{"id":8488,"date":"2014-10-06T10:36:50","date_gmt":"2014-10-06T05:06:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/laws4.us\/?p=134"},"modified":"2014-10-16T15:45:46","modified_gmt":"2014-10-16T10:15:46","slug":"cit-vs-gujarat-state-financial-services-ltd-gujarat-high-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/cit-vs-gujarat-state-financial-services-ltd-gujarat-high-court\/","title":{"rendered":"CIT vs. Gujarat State Financial Services Ltd (Gujarat High Court)"},"content":{"rendered":"

It can also be noted that the Bombay High\u00a0Court (Commissioner of Income tax\u00a0<\/strong>v. Indian Oil\u00a0Corporation Ltd<\/strong><\/a>., reported in 2010 TAXMAN 466) has in terms held that the decision of\u00a0the Tribunal in ITO v. Ekta Promoters (P.)\u00a0Ltd<\/strong>., reported in (2008) 113 ITD 719 (Delhi)\u00a0(SB) was not correct, by holding that till such\u00a0time, the assessment proceedings are completed\u00a0in respect of relevant assessment year, the\u00a0Amended Act would be applicable to the pending\u00a0proceedings. For all the pending proceedings in\u00a0regard to which the refund has been provided\u00a0under section 143(1) of the Act, which are not\u00a0concluded and finalized, the refunds are held\u00a0to be granted under section 143(1) of the Act\u00a0as finally determined when final assessment is\u00a0passed under section 143(3) of the Act.\u00a0Explanation 2 to section 234D of the Act\u00a0applies thus to the pending proceedings, where\u00a0the assessment in respect of assessment year is\u00a0not completed on June 01, 2003. The Court held\u00a0that the provision for charging interest in\u00a0every case was a part of substantive law and\u00a0not an arbitrary provision and though in those\u00a0cases where the refunds have been granted prior\u00a0to June 01, 2003, section 234D was not applied\u00a0for not having any retrospective operation,\u00a0however, in all pending proceedings, where the\u00a0assessment had not been completed on June 01,\u00a02003, the same has been made applicable. In\u00a0other words, explanation (2) to section 234D of\u00a0the Act has been made applicable to even the\u00a0assessment year commencing before June 01,\u00a02003. The only requirement in such a case would\u00a0be that the assessment has to be completed\u00a0after June 01, 2003. Therefore, after insertion\u00a0of Explanation 2, the operation of section 234D\u00a0of charging interest on the excess refund paid\u00a0to the assessee is not restricted, making\u00a0operation of such section effective from June\u00a001, 2003. In other words, the refund granted\u00a0under section 143(1) of the Act in respect of a\u00a0particular assessment year, is subject to the\u00a0final determination under subsection\u00a0(3) of\u00a0section 143 of the Act. Addition of Explanation\u00a02 to section 234D of the Act when is being held\u00a0declaratory amendment, what would be relevant\u00a0for the purpose of charging interest on the\u00a0refund granted under section 143(1) of the Act\u00a0is the date of completion of assessment. If the\u00a0assessment is framed after June 01, 2003, the\u00a0said provision shall have applicability.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It can also be noted that the Bombay High\u00a0Court (Commissioner of Income tax\u00a0v. Indian Oil\u00a0Corporation Ltd., reported in 2010 TAXMAN 466) has in terms held that the decision of\u00a0the Tribunal in ITO v. Ekta Promoters (P.)\u00a0Ltd., reported in (2008) 113 …<\/p>\n

CIT vs. Gujarat State Financial Services Ltd (Gujarat High Court)<\/span> Read More »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8488","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","judges-akil-kureshi-j","judges-sonia-gokani-j","section-234d","counsel-manish-j-shah","court-gujarat-high-court","catchwords-234d-interest","genre-domestic-tax"],"acf":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8488","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8488"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8488\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8488"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8488"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8488"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}