SGBL (India) Ltd. V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Cuttack

WP(C)/4101/2025

AI Insights

In a series of writ petitions filed by SGBL (India) Ltd., the petitioner sought the release of tax refunds along with interest that were due following successful appeals against assessment orders for various assessment years. The refunds were initially withheld and later adjusted against liabilities for different years by the Income Tax Department. The petitioner argued that the adjustments were made without calculating the interest on the refunded amounts from the date of deposit until the adjustment. The court, after hearing both parties, directed the department to re-evaluate the refunds and ensure that interest is calculated and paid accordingly.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 824216 (HC-ODISHA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SUBASH MOHANTY; AVINASH KEDIA
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHIJEET AGARWAL
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Income Tax; Interest calculation; Refund; Search and seizure
• Section: 250; 132; 244A; 127(3)

Judgement Text

" Page 1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) Nos.4099, 4100, 4101, 4104 and 4105 of 2025 SGBL (India) Ltd. (in W.P.(C) No.4099 of 2025) …. Petitioner Mr. Abhijeet Agarwal, Advocate -versus- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Cuttack …. Opposite Parties Mr. Subash Chandra Mohanty, Senior Standing Counsel along with Mr. Avinash Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel SGBL (India) Ltd. (in W.P.(C) No.4100 of 2025) …. Petitioner Mr. Abhijeet Agarwal, Advocate -versus- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Cuttack …. Opposite Parties Mr. Subash Chandra Mohanty, Senior Standing Counsel along with Mr. Avinash Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel SGBL (India) Ltd. (in W.P.(C) No.4101 of 2025) …. Petitioner Mr. Abhijeet Agarwal, Advocate -versus- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Cuttack …. Opposite Parties Mr. Subash Chandra Mohanty, Senior Standing Counsel along with Mr. Avinash Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel SGBL (India) Ltd. …. Petitioner Printed from counselvise.com Page 2 of 4 (in W.P.(C) No.4104 of 2025) Mr. Abhijeet Agarwal, Advocate -versus- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Cuttack …. Opposite Parties Mr. Subash Chandra Mohanty, Senior Standing Counsel along with Mr. Avinash Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel SGBL (India) Ltd. (in W.P.(C) No.4105 of 2025) …. Petitioner Mr. Abhijeet Agarwal, Advocate -versus- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Cuttack …. Opposite Parties Mr. Subash Chandra Mohanty, Senior Standing Counsel along with Mr. Avinash Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No. ORDER 18.12.2025 01. 1. Heard Sri Abhijeet Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Subash Chandra Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel along with Sri Avinash Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for the Department-opposite parties. 2. The petitioner in all the writ petitions referred to above has filed returns for the assessment years in question. On search and Printed from counselvise.com Page 3 of 4 seizure operation carried under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the IT Act”), order under Section 127(3) of the IT Act was passed. Consequent thereto, assessment orders are passed. 2.1. Vide order dated 28th December, 2016, an assessment order was passed, which is subjected to appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 250 of the IT Act. The appeal stood allowed, as a result of which refund flowed. The petitioner in the above writ petitions made representation(s) requesting the authority concerned to release the refund entitled to the petitioner along with applicable interest under Section 244A. Since no action is taken, these writ petitions are filed. 2.2. The limited grievance of the petitioner in the writ petitions as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the opposite parties are required to be directed to release the refund. 3. When the matter is taken up today, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Department-opposite parties furnished instructions received from the Department that the refund(s) as claimed to have been emanated from the orders of authority concerned for different assessment years have been adjusted against liability for different assessment years. 4. On a query from the Bench, learned Senior Standing Counsel could not apprise as to whether interest was calculated on the amounts of refund from the date of deposit till its adjustment. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the authority concerned after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in the batch of writ petitions to grant refund(s) along with interest with Printed from counselvise.com Page 4 of 4 respect to assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2015-16 to in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. As a result of disposal of the writ petition, pending Interlocutory Application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) Judge MRS/Laxmikant Printed from counselvise.com Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 22-Dec-2025 11:53:15 Signature Not Verified "