MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS EMPLOYEES CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED V. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL

WP/19950/2021

AI Insights

The case involves the Ministry of Communications Employees' Co-operative Housing Society Limited, which filed a writ petition against the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-Central and the Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ward \\u2013 2(2), seeking a directive for the refund of interest amounting to Rs.35,41,029 under Section 244-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2008-09 to 2013-14. The petitioner argued that although the principal amounts had been refunded, the interest as per the orders dated 30.12.2016 (Annexure-A) had not been paid. The respondents acknowledged the oversight and agreed to process the interest payment if given a reasonable time.

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 761052 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K V ARAVIND
• Assessee Lawyers: GAUTAM BHARADWAJ
• Keywords: Assessment Year; Income Tax; Interest; Legal Representation; Refund
• Section: 226; 227; 244(A)

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.19950 OF 2021 (T-IT) BETWEEN: MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS EMPLOYEES' CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED, NO.419, 1ST FLOOR, 12TH CROSS, SADASHIVNAGAR, BENGALURU-560 080. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI GAUTAM SHREEDHAR BHARADWAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL, 3RD FLOOR, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), WARD – 2(2) IV FLOOR, HMT BUILDING, BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 032. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITIES TO REFUND A SUM OF RS.35,41,029/- BEING THE INTEREST AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE PETITIONER U/S 244-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 TO 2013-14 IN TERMS OF THE ORDERS DTD.30.12.2016 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A (COLLY) ALONG WITH THE SUCH ADDITIONAL INTEREST PAYABLE UNDER SECTION 244-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO PRAYER A 2 DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER SOCIETY DTD.02.08.2018 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-D IN A TIME BOUND MANNER. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks direction to the respondent-authorities to refund a sum of Rs.35,41,029/- in terms of the orders dated 30.12.2016 produced as Annexure-A (colly) along with additional interest payable under Section 244-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in the alternative to consider the representation of the petitioner at Annexure-D dated 02.08.2018 and for other reliefs. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. The material on record indicates that it is an undisputed fact that the orders at Annexure-A (colly) dated 30.12.2016 pursuant to the proceedings having been completed in favour of the petitioner having attained finality and become conclusive and binding upon the respondent, 3 who have unequivocally stated that the petitioner would be entitled to refund of tax by him in addition to interest shown in the said document. The details of both principal amounts and the interest payable in favour of the petitioner in terms of Annexure-A (colly) are detailed in the aforesaid representation at Annexure-D dated 02.08.2018. It is the grievance of the petitioner that whilst principal amounts shown in Annexure-D in terms of Annexure-A (colly) have already been paid by the respondents, the interest shown in Annexure-A (colly) as detailed in Annexure-D have not been paid by the respondents and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that if reasonable time is granted, respondents would take necessary steps to pay interest in terms of Annexure-A (colly) in accordance with law, if not already paid to the petitioner. 5. The said submission of learned counsel for the respondents is placed on record. 4 6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the submission made at the Bar, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition directing the respondents-authorities to refund the interest component shown in Annexure-A (colly) dated 30.12.2016 as detailed in the representation of the petitioner at Annexure-D dated 02.08.2018, if not already refunded, as on today, together with applicable interest, in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. SD/- JUDGE Bmc "