News Update

India, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEAThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCBDT substitutes Form in ITR-5EV Revolution: Lessons for India to learn from US and China!London court green-signals auction of luxury apartment of fugitive Nirav ModiGovt consults RBI; finalises borrowing plan for first half of FY 2024-25Gadkari says Farmers’ protest is politically-motivatedVP calls upon women entrepreneurs to be 'Vocal for Local'America offers USD 10 mn bounty for information on ‘Blackcat’ hackers after UnitedHealth gets hitI-T- The order of the ITSC can only be reopened in cases of fraud or misrepresentation: HC8 persons including Hezbollah militants killed in Israeli strike on LebanonI-T - Income so surrendered on account of investment in excess stock during course of survey cannot be brought to tax under deeming provisions of section 69B: ITATMacron pillories EU-South Africa trade deal; calls it ‘really bad’ in BrazilI-T-Power of revision need not be exercised where facts do not reveal any lack of enquiry by AO into relevant issue & when twin requirements of order being erroneous as well as prejudicial to Revenue's interests, are not satisfied: ITATThailand’s Lower House okays Bill to legitimise same-sex marriageI-T -Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed where an assessee claims deduction u/s 80P while being ineligible therefor, but being under the bona fide impression of being eligible for such benefit : ITATYellen warns China against clean energy dumpingCus - Enhancement of declared value of imported goods is not tenable, where Department adduces no material to show how the enhanced value was computed & where no cogent rationale is made out for rejecting declared value: CESTATMilky Way’s central black hole - Twisted magnetic field observedCus - Assessee has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that goods in question imported under air way bills/bills of entry were in fact filed by him and hence the only natural corollary available to Revenue is confiscation of same: CESTATSmall investors help Trump Media’s valuation skyrocket to USD 13 billionST - When the facts are in the knowledge of department subsequent SCN alleging suppression cannot be issued and entire demand was found beyond normal period of limitation: CESTATFM Nirmala Sitharaman declines to contest LS elections as she has no fundsST - Tripura State Rifles not required to pay Service Tax under heading of Security Services, as it is is not engaged in business of providing security services: CESTATJustice Ritu Raj Awasthi joins as Judicial member of LokpalCX - Clandestine removal alleged based on consumption of raw inputs and heightened electricity usage - Tax demands based on third party statements but without permitting cross examination of deponents; case remanded to allow this exercise: CESTAT
 
I-T - No taxpayer can be prevented from netting off interest received on income tax refund, against interest payable on delayed deposit of tax, same being tax neutral exercise: ITAT

 

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JULY 19, 2018: THE ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IS - Whether a taxpayer cannot be prevented from netting off interest received on income tax refund against interest payable on delayed deposit of tax, as the same does not result in any loss to I-T Department. YES IS THE ANSWER.

Facts of the case:

The assessee company, engaged in the business of manufacturing & sale of pharmaceutical products, had e-filed its return declaring total income of Rs.252,00,29,460/- as per the normal provisions and a 'book profit' of Rs.305,22,12,660/- as per the provisions of Sec.115JB. The case of assessee was then taken up for scrutiny, wherein the AO noticed that assessee company was in receipt of interest on income tax refunds amounting to Rs.2,64,12,688/- for various assessment years, and it had claimed set off of the same against the interest of Rs.3,67,73,753/- that was paid to the Income tax Department for late payment of tax for various years. However, the claim for set off was declined by AO for the reason that interest paid did not have a nexus with the interest received by assessee. On appeal, the assessee's claim for setting off of interest income was allowed.

Tribunal held that,

++ it is found that the issue that an assessee is well within his right to set off the interest received on the income tax refund against the interest paid on the taxes to the income tax department, is squarely covered by the judgment of the High Court of Bombay in the case of DIT Vs. Bank of America NT & SA [ITA No. 177 of 2012, dated July 03, 2014], wherein it was observed that: "....The Tribunal found that the assessee Bank received interest on refund of taxes paid. It also paid interest on the taxes which were payable. The Assessee sought to set off the interest paid against the interest received and offered the net interest received to tax. Now, the Tribunal has opined that when the exercise carried out by assessee does not result in loss of revenue, there could not be any prohibition for the same...." Therefore, being of the considered view that as the issue involved in the appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of Bombay High Court, and therefore, respectfully following the same, the AO is directed to allow the claim of assessee for setting off the interest on income tax refund of Rs. 2,64,12,688/- against the interest of Rs. 3,67,73,753/- paid to the income tax department on late payment of tax for various years.

(See 2018-TIOL-1095-ITAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023