Jharkhand Bijili Vitran Nigam Limited V. Union of India through the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi, Jharkhand and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi, Jharkhand and The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi, Jharkhand

WPC/2027/2018

AI Insights

M/s Jharkhand Bijili Vitran Nigam Limited filed a writ petition against the Union of India and various Income Tax officials, seeking a directive for the processing and refund of an income tax amount of Rs.14.95 crores, which was allegedly collected under coercion and misrepresentation. The petitioner argued that despite responding to a show cause notice regarding non-deduction of tax at source under Section 194C of the Income Tax Act, no order had been passed, and the refund was not being processed. The Income Tax Department, represented by Mr. Rahul Lamba, did not object to the petitioner's request for the court to direct the department to consider the refund application, emphasizing that the decision should be made without prejudice to the merits of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 679903 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-08-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, CBDT Circular No. 2/2011
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAHUL LAMBA
• Assessee Lawyers: NITIN PASARI
• Keywords: Coercion; Income Tax Refund; Misrepresentation; TDS; Technical Issues; Manual Refund
• Section: 194C

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(T) No. 2027 of 2018 M/s Jharkhand Bijili Vitran Nigam Limited, Ranchi, Jharkhand --- --- Petitioner Versus 1.Union of India through the Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi, Jharkhand 2.Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi, Jharkhand 3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi, Jharkhand --- --- Respondents ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY Through Video Conferencing For the Petitioner : Mr. Nitin Kumar Pasari, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Rahul Lamba, Advocate 09/19.08.2020 Learned counsel Mr. N.K. Pasari for the petitioner and Mr. Rahul Lamba for the respondent Income Tax Department are present through Video Conferencing. 2. Petitioner has approached this Court for the following reliefs: a) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction directing upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Income Tax Refund available to the Petitioner Assessee is not being processed for years together, when undisputedly the amount being claimed by way of refund is an amount realized from the assesse under coercion and misrepresentation. b) Consequent upon showing cause, if any, and on being satisfied that the amount realized from the assesse is de hors the scheme of the Income Tax Act read with the circular issued by the CBDT from time to time, the amount refundable to the assesse be directed to be refunded forthwith along with applicable rate of interest available under the Income Tax Act and the rules framed thereunder. c) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing upon the Respondents to accept the offline 2 application for grant of refund, since the online claim cannot be lodged because of some technical reasons in the website of the Income Tax Department and after verification and satisfaction, refund the same with interest. d) For issuance of any other appropriate direction(s) or (order(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in view of the facts & circumstances of the case for doing conscionable justice to the Petitioner. 3. According to the petitioner, it had involuntarily deposited an amount of Rs.14.95 crores with the Income Tax Department in March, 2009 threatened by the attachment of bank account and prosecution on the basis of survey conducted by the Department towards non-deduction of tax at source under Section 194 C of the Income Tax Act. A show cause was also issued upon it. Though, petitioner replied to the show cause notice but according to learned counsel for the petitioner, no order has been passed. Thereafter, petitioner has approached this Court in the year 2018 in the present writ petition with the aforesaid prayer. 4. However, learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, made reference to Annexure- IA/2 to I.A. No. 7781 of 2019, which is the communication addressed to the Senior Manager (Finance & Accounts), JBVNL, Ranchi dated 20.10.2016 by the Deputy Commissioner, Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi, to the effect that the challan of Rs. 14,95,07,103/- is still unclaimed as per TRACES. Thus the refund against this challan can be claimed after nullifying the demand in the TAN- RCHJ00086C. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. N.K. Pasari has also made reference to the letter dated 22.01.2020 enclosed as annexure- IA/1 to I.A. No. 931 of 2020. This is the communication between the Income Tax Officer (TRACES), CPC TDS, Ghaziabad and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), TDS Circle, Ranchi on the subject of approval for issuance of manual refund in the case of Jharkhand State Electricity Board (State PSU), Ranchi [TAN: RCHJ00086C]. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that through this communication the 3 Deputy Commissioner, Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi has been requested on the instant subject that if refund is issued manually, details of challan and refund amount may be informed to the office of the CIT, CPC(TDS) in order to freeze the challan so that same cannot be used in future. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner therefore seeks liberty to approach the competent authority under the Income Tax Department in the light of the aforesaid communications for redressal of petitioner’s grievances. He submits that all the supporting documents would also be enclosed to their application in this regard for a just determination. 6. Counter affidavit and supplementary affidavit have also been filed by the Income Tax Department. Learned counsel Mr. Rahul Lamba representing the respondent Income Tax Department however does not object to the instant prayer. He submits that this Court may make it abundantly clear that it has not made any observations on the merits of the case of the parties. He submits that the letter dated 22.01.2020 (AnnexureIA/1) indicates that the TDS Assessing Officer may issue the refund manually after due verification / procedure in view of Circular No. 2/2011 in F.No. 385/2o5/2010-IT (B) dated 27.04.2011 (copy enclosed). He further submits that appropriate time may be fixed for the authorities to take decision in this regard due to difficulties due to the pandemic. 7. Having considered the limited prayer made on behalf of the petitioner now, in the light of the bare facts and the prayer made in the writ petition noted above, we do not intend to get into the merits of the case at this stage. Petitioner, if so advised, may approach the competent authority for redressal of his grievance in accordance with law. In case, such an application is made, the competent authority under the Income Tax Department may endeavour to take decision thereupon within reasonable time preferably within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Let it be made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case of the parties. 4 8. The writ petition is disposed of. Pending I.A.s are closed. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) A.Mohanty "