M/s. Optum Global Solutions India Private Limited. V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

WP/7557/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Optum Global Solutions India Private Limited, which filed a writ petition against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Union of India, Ministry of Finance, seeking a refund of INR 3,29,63,393 as per a rectification order dated 20.05.2019, along with applicable interest. The petitioner argued that despite providing necessary bank details for the refund, the amount was not released due to alleged technical glitches by the respondents. The court found that the delay of over two years in processing the refund, despite the petitioner fulfilling all requirements, was unreasonable and directed the respondents to expedite the refund process.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 764515 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Sections 244A(1) and 244A(1A) of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: J V PRASAD; GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: MAMILLA ASHWIN REDDY
• Keywords: Income Tax Refund; Technical glitch; Writ of Mandamus; Bank Account Re-validation
• Section: 244A(1A); 244A(1)

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) [337s ] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 7557 oF 2024 Between: M/s. Optum Global Solutions lndia Private Limited., Having its registered office at. 5th, 6th and 7th ftoor, Office Lerel Building No. i 4, Sundew Properties, SEZ (Mindspace), Hi-Tech City, Madhapur, Hyderabad 500081, Telangana. Represented by its Authorized Representative, Mr. Anuj Jain S/o Shri Anil Kumar Jain, Occ. Director, aged about 42 years, Rl/o Hyderabad. ...PETITIONER AND 1. Deputy Commissroner of lncome Tax, Circle 5(1), B-Block, 2nd Floor, I T Tower, AC Guards, f ilasab Tank, Hyderabad, Andhra pradesh,500OO4 2. Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Rep., by its Secretary (Revenue) North Block - New Delhi - 1 10001 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 o'f lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus, or any other writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus drrecting the Respondent to issue/release to the Petitioner, the principal cornponent refund of INR 3,29,63,393/- as determined vide the rectification Order dated 20.O5.2O19 along with applicable interest as per Sections 244A(1 and 244A(1A'1 of the Act till the date of release of refund and delete the illegal and incorrect adjustment of INR 9,83,395/-, made against non- existent demands, from the total refund of INR 4,30,24,3271- due for presenl AY 2009-10 For such further and other reriefs as this Hon'bre court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case and Award the costs of this writ Petition in favour of the petitioner and against Respondenls. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. MAMILLA ASHWIN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI J. V. PRASAD (sENtoR sc FoR TNCOME TAX) Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI cADl PRAVEEN KUMAR, DY. SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE N.TUI(ARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.7557 of 2o24 ORDER (per Hon'ble Si Justice P.SA.M KOSEII) Heard Mr. M.Ashwin Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. J.V.Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing for respondent No. I and Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, Iearned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.2. 2. The present is a Writ Petition which has been filed seeking for a direction to the respondents for refund of the amount determined in the consequential order dated 29 .O3.2O19 for the assessment year 2009- 1O. 3. On the previous date of hearing, the learned Standing Counsel for the Department u,as directed to seek instructions. Today, the learned Standing Counsel has produced a note of the Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle-V (1), Hyderabad. A perusal of the said note, what is apparently evident that there is no dispute so far as the entitlement of the petitioner for the refund of money in terms of the consequential order dated 29.O3.2OL9 (Annexure P- I ) for the year 2OO9- lO is concerned. Initially, thdre PSK J&NTR,J W-P.No.7557 of 2024 appears to have occurred some technical glitch on the prrrt of the respondents in releasing the amount. Subsequently, the Department has made certain correspondence with the petitioner, calling for re-validation of the bank account particulars so as to match with the details indicated by the CPC, Bangalore. 4. karned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has given the information to the Department on various r)ccasions, and as per the last request also, they have given the complete details on 09.O7.2021 i.e., almost two years eight months back. In spite of the same, the respondents have not been able lo make the refund which led to hling of the instant Writ Petition. 5. In terms of the note submitted b1' thc Assistant Commissioner, what is apparently evident is that thc authorities are not denying the entitlement of the petitioncr for refund, but only found it diflicult to do it because of certain technical reasons. 6. In our considered opinion, two years eight monrhs itself is a pretty long time, in spite of the petitioner having revalidated his Bank account particulars with the respondent atrthorities for clearing of the refund. One cannot forget the fact that the consequential order is one which has been passed on 29.03.2019 2 PSK,J&NTR,J qI.P,No-75S7 of 2024 i.e., almost five years have lapsed. The period of five years still is a very long for an assessee to have his claim of refund. 7. Therefore, we cannot accept the contention of the Department that because of technicalities, the authorities could not make refund for a period of flrve years. We are sure the Income Tax Department is not so technically weak and poor that they are unable to cope up with such situation for duration of five years, and at least the period of two years and eight months from the last correspondence made between the petitioner and the Department. Therefore, we are of the hrm view that no amount of technical glitches should come in the way now for the respondents to ensure the refund being made to the petitioner in terms of the order dated 29.O3.2019 which till date has not been disputed by the respondent-Department. 8. Hence, the respondents are directed to ensure that the entire refund amount which the petitioner is entitled to be refunded, including the statutory interest that would accrue on the said amount, within an outer limit of four weeks from today, failing which the entire amount shall carry interest @12o/o per annum in addition to the statutory interest. The amount of interest that accrues and is payable shall be recovered from the concerned 3 PSK,J&NTR.J W.P.No.7557 of 2C officia-ls of the Income Tax Department who havr: failed in discharging their responsibililies in clearing the refuncl promptly. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. 4 //TRUE COPY// 1. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 5(1), B-Block, 2nd Floor, I T Tower, AC Guards, Masab Tank, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, 500004 2. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue (Revenue) North Block - New Delhi - 1 10001 3 One CC to SRl. MAMILLA ASHWIN REDDY, Advocate [OPU(]l 4. One CC to SRl. GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DY. SOLICITOR C;ENERAL OF rNDrA IOPUC] 5. One CC to SRl. J V PRASAD (SC FOR INCOME TAX) [OPI,C] 6. Two CD Copies BM GJP t- SD/. K.SREERAMA MURTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR q/ SECTION OFfICER To, I I HIGH COURT DATED:2210312024 ORDER WP.No.7557 of 2024 ALLOWING THE WRITPETITION WITHOUT COSTS a1' o !- . iiE S14 O k * r^ o 2 nn zazt tr P 2 i,l icr.i'ri ous I "