B.R.ARORA,J. - (1.) THE Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, has referred the following question of law under S. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, for the opinion of the High Court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that interest under S. 214 of the IT Act was rightly directed to be allowed to the assessee from 1st April, 1980 to the date of issue of refund instead of date of regular assessment on the excess payment of advance tax ?"
(2.) THE assessee M/s Hindustan Radiators, Jodhpur, was assessed under S. 143(3)/144B of the IT Act, for the asst. yr. 1980-81 by the ITO, Central Circle, Jodhpur, for the total income of Rs. 10,78,180. The assessment was completed on 8th Sept., 1983. The assessee paid advance tax amounting to Rs. 2,13,600. The assessee challenging the assessment, preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), Jodhpur, which was allowed in part and the income assessed was reduced to Rs. 5,75,589. Due to the reduction of the assessed income, the assessee was allowed refund of excess of advance tax paid by him. The ITO, however, did not allow interest under S. 214 on the excess advance tax paid by the assessee. The assessee filed application under S. 154 of the IT Act before the Assessing Officer claiming interest under S. 214/244(1A) on the excess advance tax paid by him, but this application was dismissed by the ITO. Aggrieved with the order disallowing interest on the advance tax, which was ordered to be refunded, the assessee filed an appeal. The appeal was allowed and the ITO was directed to pay interest upto the date of refund. The Revenue, aggrieved with the decision of the CIT(A), Jodhpur, preferred an appeal before the Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, and the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue and upheld the order passed by the CIT(A), Jodhpur. The Revenue, thereafter, preferred an application under S. 256(1) of the Act before the Tribunal, to refer the questions of law mentioned in the application for the opinion of the High Court and the Tribunal referred the question of law mentioned in para No. 1 above. It is contended by the learned counsel for the Revenue that the learned Tribunal committed an error in allowing the interest under S. 214 of the Act to the assessee on the excess amount of advance tax paid by the assessee because no amount of interest can be allowed under S. 214 on such amount. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the Revenue has placed reliance upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in CIT vs. Hindustan Engineering Co. (1995) 215 ITR 527 (Raj).
(3.) WE have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Revenue.;