CISCO SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL B V V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/7827/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Cisco Systems International B.V., a company incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands, which filed a writ petition against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-1(1), and other related authorities. The petition sought a directive to process the return of income for the assessment year 2010-11 and to issue a refund of Rs. 53,59,544 along with interest. The Petitioner argued that their request was in line with the law as per a previous Division Bench judgment and Article 350 of the Constitution, which mandates timely consideration of such grievances. The Respondents did not contest the applicability of the law but reserved their right to keep all contentions open.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 687777 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: K NAGESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX (2015) 376 ITR (KAR)
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, Article 350 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: DILIP; MADANAN PILLAI
• Assessee Lawyers: NAGESWAR D D
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2010-11; Income Tax; International Taxation; Mandamus; Refund; Writ petition
• Section: 376 ITR (KAR)

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2023:KHC:28875 WP No. 7827 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.7827 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN: CISCO SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL B.V., HAARLERBERGWEG, 13-19, 11001 CH, AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS - 1025, INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAW OF NETHERLANDS, (C/O ERNST AND YOUNG LLP, 1ST FLOOR, 'A' WING, DIVYASREE CHAMBERS, O' SHAUGHNESSY ROAD, LANGFORD TOWN, SHANTINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027). PAN: AADCC920ID REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, SR. MANAGER TAX, MR. SRIHARI VARANASI, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT FLAT 8173, SOBHA FOREST VIEW APARTMENT, VAJARAHALLI MAIN ROAD, OFF KANAKAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 062. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGESWAR RAO D.D., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE-1(1), Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2023:KHC:28875 WP No. 7827 of 2023 BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095. 3. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), (SOUTH ZONE), C.R. BUILDING, NO.1, QUEEN'S ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 4. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVT.OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI - 110 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DILIP M., ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3; SRI. MADANAN R. PILLAI, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO PROCESS RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 AND FORTHWITH ISSUE REFUND OF RS.53,59,544 TOGETHER WITH INTEREST TIL DATE OF PAYMENT OF REFUND INTO PETITIONER'S BANK ACCOUNT AS LAWFULLY DUE TO THE PETITIONER AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2023:KHC:28875 WP No. 7827 of 2023 ORDER Petitioner - Assessee before this court with the following principal prayer: “Issue appropriate writ mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents to process return of income for assessment year 2010-11 and forthwith issue refund of Rs. 53,59,544/- together with interest till date of payment of refund into Petitioner's bank account as lawfully due to the Petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that in terms of the law laid down in the Division Bench judgment in K NAGESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME-TAX (2015) 376 ITR (KAR) the prayer of petitioner needs to be allowed since it is innocuous. He also notifies to the Court the mandate of Article 350 of the Constitution which imposes an obligation on all authorities to consider grievance of the kind in accordance with law and in a time bound way. 3. Learned Panel counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 opposes the Petition contending that unless duty to consider is demonstrated, writ petition - 4 - NC: 2023:KHC:28875 WP No. 7827 of 2023 is misconceived. When the decision of Division Bench supra is notified, he fairly agrees to instruct his clients to look into the grievance of Petitioner in accordance with law and within a reasonable period should all contentions be kept open. This is appreciable. In view of the above, Writ Petition is disposed off, placing on record the assurance of Panel Counsel for the answering respondents as above. Time for compliance is eight weeks. All contentions kept open. It is open to the answering respondent to solicit any information/documents from the side of Petitioner as are required for due consideration of her representation; however, in the guise of such solicitation, no delay shall be brooked. Now, no costs. Sd/- JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11 CT: ABS "