INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (MUMBAI BENCH)
SAMSARA SHIPPING PVT LTD MUMBAI – Appellant
Versus
DCIT CIRCLE 3(1)(1) MUMBAI – Respondent
ITA 6724/MUM/2025[2021-22]
##PAGE1##
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT AND
SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 6724/Mum/2025
(Assessment Year: 2021-22)
Samsara Shipping Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer
101/102, Technopolis Knowledge Room No. 607, 6th Floor,
Park, Mahakali Caves Road, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road,
Chakala MIDC S.O., Mumbai
Mumbai-400 093
PAN/GIR No. AAACS 9285 Q
(Appellant) : (Respondent)
Appellant by : Shri Sandeep Bhalla &
Shri Sagar Joshi
Respondent by : Shri Arun Kanti Datta
Date of Hearing : 18.12.2025
Date of Pronouncement : 23.12.2025
O R D E R
Per Saktijit Dey, Vice President:
This is an appeal by the assessee, against the order dated 27.08.2025 of
Addl./JCIT(A), Panchkula, pertaining to the assessment year (A.Y.) 2021-22.
2. The sole grievance of the assessee in the appeal is concerning levy of interest u/s.
220(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short). Of course, vide letter dated
17.12.2025 the assessee has sought to raise an additional ground, challenging the validity
of the order passed u/s. 154 of the Act on account of non-mentioning of document
identification number (DIN). Be that as it may, we propose to deal the issue on merits.
3. Briefly stated, the assessee is a resident corporate entity. For the assessment year
under dispute, the assessee filed its return of income on 14.03.2022, declaring total income
of Rs.55,22,22,410/-. Though initially, the return of income was processed u/s. 143(1) of
##PAGE2##2
ITA No. 6724/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2021-22)
Samsara Shipping Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO
the Act, however, subsequently, it was selected for scrutiny. In course of assessment
proceeding, the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) called for various details and after
examining them ultimately, concluded the assessment vide order dated 22.12.2022 u/s.
143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, determining the total income at Rs.204,90,47,769/-, after
adding an amount of Rs.149,68,25,359/-. After completing the assessment as aforesaid, the
A.O. issued the assessment order along with the demand notice dated 22.12.2022, in terms
of section 156 of the Act, mentioning “zero” document. Thereafter, the A.O., based on
objection raised by the Revenue audit party, having found that while computing the tax
liability, total income was mistakenly taken at Rs.55,22,22,410/-, resulting in short levy of
tax to the tune of Rs.116,75,23,779/- passed a rectification order u/s. 154 of the Act. In the
income tax computation sheet attached to the order passed u/s. 154 of the Act, the A.O.
computed interest u/s. 220(2) of the Act for an amount of Rs.32,54,36,620/-.
4. Being aggrieved with levy of such interest, the assessee preferred an appeal before
ld. first appellate authority.
5. It was the say of the assessee before the first appellate authority that since there was
no failure on the part of the assessee, in terms of section 220(1) of the Act, there cannot be
any levy of interest u/s. 220(1) of the Act. The assessee further submitted that interest
cannot be levied u/s. 220(2) of the Act for a period prior to the order passed levying such
interest. The submissions made by the assessee, however, did not find favour with the first
appellate authority. He observed, interest u/s. 220(2) of the Act is consequential and
automatic. He observed, since in the original notice of demand issued u/s. 156 of the Act
nil demand was shown as a result of computational error, the demand crystalized after the
rectification order passed u/s. 154 of the Act would have retrospective effect from the date
##PAGE3##3
ITA No. 6724/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2021-22)
Samsara Shipping Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO
of the original assessment order. Accordingly, he upheld the levy of interest u/s. 220(2) of
the Act.
6. Being aggrieved, the assessee is before us. At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel
appearing for the assessee primarily reiterated the submission made before the first
appellate authority. Further, he relied upon the following decisions:
1. Vodafone Mobile Service Ltd. vs. Union of India [2013] 3
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.