MAXIM INDIA INTEGRATED CIRCUIT V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/9467/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Maxim India Integrated Circuit Design Private Limited, which sought a refund of Rs. 55,40,685 that was set off against an alleged outstanding demand for the assessment year 2005-06. The petitioner argued that the respondents did not issue an Order Giving Effect (OGE) within the prescribed time limit after the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The petitioner had previously paid taxes under protest and filed for a refund which was not granted, leading to the filing of this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The court's decision was based on the failure of the respondents to comply with the statutory time limits set under Section 153(3) of the Income Tax Act for passing the OGE.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 752335 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: E I SANMATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: GEETHA K
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income tax appellate tribunal; Refund; Taxes paid under protest; Order giving effect to
• Section: 153(3); 226; 244A(1A); 227; 244A(1)

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:36815 WP No. 9467 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 9467 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. MAXIM INDIA INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DESIGN PRIVATE LIMITED S 51/2/3/4, S39/5, 4th FLOOR, COMMERCIO MANTRI TOWER B DB HALLI KARIYAMMANA AGRAHARA BENGALURU - 560 103 (REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR) MR.VIMAL CHANDRAKANT BHATT S/O MR. CHANDRAKANT MOHANLAL BHAT AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956 …PETITIONER (BY SMT. GEETHA RANI K., SRI. NARENDRA KUMAR J JAIN ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4(1)(1) 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU 560 095 2. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL PROCESSING UNIT, (CPC), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BENGLURU 560 500 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:36815 WP No. 9467 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE LEARNED RESPONDENT TO GRANT REFUND OF RS. 55,40,685/- WHICH IS SET OFF AGAINST ALLEGED OUTSTANDING DEMAND FOR AY 2005-06 AS PER THE INTIMATION ISSUED THE LEARNED SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 17.05.2020 VIDE CPC/1920/A6//1972637613 ENCLOSED AS ANNXURE -H AND CPC/2021/A6/183501003 DATED 15.02.2021 ENCLOSED AS ANNXURE-K AND ETC THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: \"a. Issue as far as petitioner is concerned by an appropriate writ or Order in the nature of Mandamus or otherwise, to the learned first respondent to grant refund for taxes paid under protest as per Annexure- F letter filed by the petitioner before First respondent dated 04.03.2007 along with interest under section 244A(1) and additional interest under Section 244A(1A) after adjusting the refund already issued. and b. Grant such other reliefs as this Honourable High Court may think fit including the cost of this writ petition.\" - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:36815 WP No. 9467 of 2024 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 28.11.2008, the petitioner filed an appeal, which was partly allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) vide order dated 11.11.2011. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), both the petitioner and respondent-revenue filed appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which set aside both the orders vide order dated 21.03.2017 and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration in accordance with law. 4. It is the grievance of the petitioner that time limit of nine months prescribed under Section 153(3) of the Income Tax Act having expired from the end of financial year in which the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal order was received by the respondent and the time limit to pass order giving effect to (OGE) had lapsed and consequently, petitioner would be entitled to receive refund of the taxes paid by him under protest. Under these circumstances, petitioner submitted representations dated - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:36815 WP No. 9467 of 2024 30.12.2020 and 19.02.2024, despite which the respondent did not grant refund and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned order and submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. As rightly contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, the undisputed sequence of the events that occurred before filing of the petition will clearly indicate that the respondent have not passed any OGE before filing the present petition. Consequently, in the light of the provisions contained under Section 153 of Income Tax Act, after lapse of stipulated time, petitioner would be entitled to refund of the taxes paid by him under the protest together with applicable interest under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act. 7. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that necessary directions are to be issued to respondent to grant refund in favour of the petitioner together with applicable interest under Section 244A of the Act. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:36815 WP No. 9467 of 2024 8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is hereby allowed. ii) Respondents are directed to grant refund in favour of the petitioner together with applicable interest within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE MDS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3.2 "