Court :
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Brief :
Assessee is in appeal before us. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee argued that applying Rule 8D for the year under consideration is against the ratio laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT 328 ITR 81.
We find that this issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of JCIT Vs Rolta India Ltd. 330 ITR 470 wherein it has been held that in case of company which are liable to tax u/s. 115JB / minimum alternative tax , have to pay interest u/s. 234B/234C of the Act. We therefore direct the AO to levy interest as per provisions of the Act after giving effect to the decision of ground No. 1.
Citation :
M/s. Govind Properties Pvt. Ltd.,Seksaria Chambers, 4th Floor, Nagindas Master Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 PAN-AAACG 1408P (Appellant) Vs. The ACIT-2(1), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent)
You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements
Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access
Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
- No Ads
- WhatsApp Community
- Daily E-Newsletter
- Unlimited Judgements Access
- Profile Visitors
- Link Social Profiles
- Featured Job Posts
- Pro Badge
- Expert GST Guidance
- Unlimited Forum Replies
- Download Content in PDF
Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience. 07941056694
Comments
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
CAclubindia
