DENAVE INDIA PVT. LTD. V. DY./ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7910 NEW DELHI AND ORS.

W.P.(C)/3285/2020

AI Insights

Denave India Pvt. Ltd. filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7910 New Delhi, and others, seeking a mandamus to process and issue a refund of Rs.10,75,56,607 for the assessment years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20, and to quash notices that sought to adjust this refund against a tax demand for the assessment year 2016-17. The primary legal issue revolved around the entitlement to interest on the delayed refund for the assessment year 2018-19. The court heard extensive arguments and considered the affidavit from the Income Tax Department, which led to the disposal of the petition with directions based on the contents of the affidavit.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 751166 (HC-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-10-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ZOHEB HOSSAIN; KALRAV MEHROTRA; BHARATHI RAJU
• Assessee Lawyers: S VASUDEVAN; SHASHANK SHARMA
• Keywords: Adjustment; Income Tax Refund; Mandamus; Tax demand
• Section: 245

Judgement Text

"W.P.(C) 3285/2020 Page 1 of 3 #9 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Delivered On: 13.10.2020 + W.P.(C) 3285/2020 & CM APPL. 11527/2020 DENAVE INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner versus DY./ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7910 NEW DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Vasudevan & Mr. Shashank Sharma, Advs. For the Respondents : Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue with Kalrav Mehrotra, Adocate for R-1 & R-2 Mrs Bharathi Raju, CGSC for R-3 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH J U D G M E N T SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J. (Open Court – via Video Conferencing) 1. The present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been instituted on behalf of the petitioner praying as follows: (a) Allow the present writ petition by issuing a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order/direction to the respondent No.1 to process and issue the refund amount of Rs.10,75,56,607/- to the petitioner; W.P.(C) 3285/2020 Page 2 of 3 (b) Allow the present writ petition by issuing a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order/direction quashing the notices dated 03.01.2020 issued for the A.Y. 2017-18 and 09.05.2020 issued for the A.Y. 2018-19 and 2019-20 u/s 245 of the Act seeking to adjust the refund due to the petitioner with the tax demand of A.Y. 2016-17. (c) Issue interim directions restraining the respondent No.1 from taking any action for the recovery of the impugned tax demand of Rs.1,09,63,920/- for A.Y. 2016-17 by adjusting the same against the refund due for the A.Y. 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20. (d) Pass any other orders/directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the given facts and circumstances of the case, in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent No.1. 2. We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties at length and have perused the material placed on record. 3. Our attention has been invited to the affidavit dated 12.10.2020, authored by Mr. Ram Niwas Yadav, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1), Delhi. 4. The Income Tax Department is directed to comply with the averments made on their behalf in the said affidavit dated 12.10.2020, referred to hereinabove, for the assessment year 2017-18. 5. It is an admitted position that the only issue that survives in the present writ petition is the interest payable by the Income Tax Department, in relation to payment of the income tax refund, the petitioner is entitled to for the assessment year 2018-19. W.P.(C) 3285/2020 Page 3 of 3 6. Whilst the petitioner states that it is entitled to interest from the date of the order dated 13.11.2019, till the date of actual payment, it is the department’s assertion that the petitioner would be entitled to the same, only upto the date of the order allowing income tax refund. 7. In view of the foregoing, whilst keeping the question of law stated hereinabove open for determination in an appropriate proceeding, the present writ petition is disposed of since the principal relief seeking income tax refund has been satisfied, whilst reserving the liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate steps, if any, in accordance with law. 8. No further directions are called for. 9. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. The pending application also stands disposed of. SIDDHARTH MRIDUL (JUDGE) TALWANT SINGH (JUDGE) OCTOBER 13, 2020/dn Click here to check corrigendum, if any "