High Court Kerala High Court

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Sego Restaurant & Airland … on 14 December, 2009

Kerala High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S.Sego Restaurant & Airland … on 14 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

ITA.No. 1022 of 2009()


1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,THRISSUR.
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. M/S.SEGO RESTAURANT & AIRLAND LODGINGS,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E)

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN

 Dated :14/12/2009

 O R D E R
                                                                                  C.R.
                   C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &
                              V.K.MOHANAN, JJ.
              ....................................................................
                       I.T. Appeal No.1022 of 2009
              ....................................................................
             Dated this the 14th day of December, 2009.

                                     JUDGMENT

Ramachandran Nair, J.

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue challenging the order of

the Tribunal cancelling demand of interest under Section 234B(3) of

the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called “the Act”) in proceedings

completed by the Assessing Officer under Section 154 of the Act. We

have heard Senior Standing counsel appearing for the appellant and

Adv.Sri.P.Balakrishnan appearing for the respondent-assessee.

2. When the return of the assessee filed for the year 1995-96 was

processed under Section 143(1), the Assessing Officer found that the

assessee had paid over 90% of the assessed tax as advance tax which

included tax deducted at source as well. Even though the assessment

was taken up for scrutiny and regular assessment under Section 143(3)

was completed on 2.12.1997, the demand of tax remained the same and

consequently there was no shortage of advance tax and so much so,

2

interest was not levied under Section 234B(1) of the Act. However, the

assessment was modified under Section 147 on 18.2.2002 which led to

an additional demand of Rs.84,824/-. Even though no interest was

levied under Section 234B in the reassessment proceedings completed

under Section 147, the Assessing Officer later rectified the

reassessment under Section 154 levying interest under Section 234B(3)

on the additional demand of tax. Even though first appeal was

unsuccessful, the Tribunal on second appeal filed by the assessee,

cancelled the demand of interest for the reason that interest under

Section 234B(3) can be levied only if there was original levy of interest

in first assessment under Section 234B(1) of the Act. The question

raised by the Revenue is whether the Tribunal was justified in holding

that interest under Section 234B(3) can be levied only if there was a

levy of interest under Section 234B(1) of the Act. Since the question to

be considered is on the interpretatio of Section 234B(3), we have to

necessarily refer to the said provision and for easy reference we extract

it hereunder:

3

“Where, as a result of an order of re-assessment or re-
computation under section 147 or section 153A, the amount
on which interest was payable under sub-section (1) is
increased, the assessee shall be liable to pay simple interest
at the rate of one per cent for every month or part of a
month comprised in the period commencing on the day
following the date of determination of total income under
sub-section (1) of section 143 and where a regular
assessment is made as is referred to in sub-section (1)
following the date of such regular assessment and ending on
the date of the re-assessment or re-computation under
section 147 or section 153A, on the amount by which the
tax on the total income determined on the basis of the re-
assessment or re-computation exceeds the tax on the total
income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or
on the basis of the regular assessment aforesaid.”

3. The question to be considered is whether the above sub-section

is attracted only if there is levy of interest under Section 234B(1) in the

intimation issued under Section 143(1) or in the regular assessment

completed under Section 143(3) as held by the Tribunal. Admittedly in

this case in the determination of total income under sub-section (1) of

Section 143 and in the regular assessment completed under Section 143

(3), the Assessing Officer found that the advance tax paid is 90% and

above of the assessed tax and consequently there was no liability for

4

the assessee to pay any interest under Section 234B(1) of the Act which

provides for interest only if payment of advance tax is less than 90% of

the assessed tax. However, when assessment was revised under

Section 147 to bring to tax escaped income, the tax demand went up

leading to shortfall of advance tax payable under Section 234B(1) of

the Act. In other words, the advance tax paid was less than 90% of the

tax finally assessed and found payable in the income escaping

assessment completed under Section 147 of the Act. The contention of

the assessee is that the words “the amount on which interest was

payable under sub-section(1) is increased” referred to in sub-section (3)

happens only when there was a shortfall in payment of advance tax in

the original assessment itself leading to levy of interest under Section

234B(1) so that when reassessment leads to further shortfall in payment

of advance tax, interest liability arises under Section 234B(3) of the

Act. Standing Counsel on the other hand submitted that for levy of

interest under Section 234B(3), it is immaterial whether there was

shortfall in advance tax in the regular assessment or not and according

5

to him, even if the first assessment led to refund of excess tax paid, still

interest could be demanded under Section 234B(3) if on reassessment

completed under Section 147 advance tax paid is found less than 90%

of the tax assessed in reassessment proceedings. Counsel for the

assessee brought to our notice Section 234D which was introduced by

Finance Act 2003 with effect from 1.6.2003, which provides for levy of

interest in the course of regular assesment on excess tax refunded in

proceedings completed under Section 143(1) of the Act. According to

assessee’s counsel, Section 234B(3) could be invoked only for

increasing the demand of interest levied in original assessment under

Section 234B(1) and when no interest is demanded under the said

provision in the original assessment, the Assessing Officer cannot

invoke Section 234B(3) for levying interest for the first time after

revision of assessment under Section 147 of the Act. We are unable to

uphold the finding of the Tribunal and the contention of the counsel for

the assessee because scheme of levy of interest for non-payment or

short-payment of advance tax under various provisions of Section

6

234B is in stages. Interest under Section 234B(1) is attracted when the

advance tax paid is found to be less than 90% of the assessed tax.

While the advance tax paid remains a static amount, assessed tax will

keep on changing depending on modifications made in assessment.

The proceedings completed under Section 143(1) could be modified in

a regular assessment under Section 143(3) which may lead to increase

in demand of tax. Similarly when a regular assessment completed

under Section 143(3) is revised under Section 147 and such a revised

assessment leads to higher demand of tax, then the shortfall in advance

tax naturally increases. Sub-section (1) and sub-section (3) provide for

levy of interest for non-payment or short-payment of advance tax in

stages. While in the regular assessment interest under Section 234B(1)

is levied to the extent of shortfall in payment of advance tax upto date

of such regular assessment, interest could be later levied if the

assessment so completed is revised under Section 147 leading to higher

demand of tax, thereby increasing the shortfall in payment of advance

tax. However, it is specifically provided in sub-section (3) of Section

7

234B that the additional demand of interest under the said provision

should be from the date following the date on which regular assessment

was completed either under Section 143(1) or 143(3) of the Act. The

only condition for levying interest under Section 234B(3) is increase in

the shortfall in advance tax as a consequence of revision of assessment

under Section 147 of the Act. While interest on shortfall in payment of

advance tax is levied in the regular assessment under Section 234B(1)

upto the date of completion of assessment, interest on further shortfall

in advance tax with reference to tax determined on reassessment under

Section 147 is levied under sub-section (3) of Section 234B. Increase

in shortfall of advance tax on reassessment leads to levy of interest

under Section 23B(3) and this Section does not require that in order to

attract liability under it there should be a levy of interest in regular

assessment under Section 234B(1) of the Act. In our view, even if the

assessee is found to have paid full advance tax with reference to the

income assessed in regular assessment and there was no occasion to

levy any interest under Section 234B(1) of the Act, still assessee will

8

be liable to pay interest under Section 234B(3) if there is a shortfall in

payment of advance tax with reference to the tax finally determined in

reassessment completed under Section 147 of the Act. The scheme of

various provisions of Section 234B is that interest for shortfall in

advance tax is based on the tax finally determined under the provisions

of the Act. Therefore, we hold that the assessee who was not liable to

pay interest under Section 234B(1) of the Act in the regular

assessment, is liable to pay interest under Section 234B(3) on the

shortpayment of advance tax with reference to the tax assessed under

Section 147 from the date following the regular assessment till date of

completion of the revised assessment under Section 147.

4. The next contention to be considered is whether the Assessing

Officer who did not levy interest under Section 234B(3) of the Act in

reassessment, could levy interest in rectification proceedings completed

under Section 154 of the Act. Here again, we are unable to accept the

contention of the assessee that interest could not be levied in

rectification proceedings under Section 154 because so long as interest

9

under Section 234B(3) is mandatory, omission in the reassessment

completed under Section 147 will make it defective warranting it’s

rectification under Section 154 for levy of interest under Section 234B

(3) of the Act. We, therefore, hold that the omission to levy interest

under Section 234B(3) in reassessment completed under Section 147

could be made up in rectification proceedings under Section 154 of the

Act.

5. In view of the above findings, we allow the appeal by

reversing the order of the Tribunal and by restoring in principle the

levy of interest under Section 234B(3) of the Act. However, we notice

that interest is demanded under Section 234B(3) on the entire balance

demand of tax raised in reassessment proceedings. Interest could be

demanded under Section 234B(3) on the shortfall of advance tax paid.

In other words, advance tax payable should be first determined based

on reassessment and reduce therefrom actual amount of advance tax

paid and interest should be demanded only on the differential amount,

that too, from the date following the regular assessment till date of

10

completion of the assessment under Section 147. If there is mistake in

the calculation of interest under Section 234B(3), there will be

direction to the officer to correct the same in tune with the scheme of

the Section as stated above.

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Judge

V.K.MOHANAN
Judge
pms