THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. SRI P SHIVASHANKAR

WA/6327/2012

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer against the order of a learned Single Judge, which set aside the rejection of a claim for interest on a tax refund. The original rejection was based on Instruction No.13/2006. The Single Judge directed the Commissioner to reconsider the claim in light of Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which pertains to the interest on refunds. The High Court's decision in this writ appeal did not delve into the substantive issues but rather directed a re-examination of the claim by the Commissioner, emphasizing the need for adherence to the legal provisions and proper procedural conduct.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 700959 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: A SHANKAR; M LAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: K V ARAVIND
• Keywords: Income Tax; Interest on Refund; Instruction No.13/2006
• Section: 244A

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF JANUARY 2014 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP B BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR W.A.NO.6327/2012(T-IT) BETWEEN 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NO.55/1 SHILPASHREE VIDYARANYA COMPLEX VISHVESHWARANAGAR MYSORE-570 008 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(3) NO.55/1, SHILPASHREE VIDYARANYA COMPLEX VISHVESHWARANAGAR MYSORE-570 008 ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI K V ARAVIND, ADV.,) AND SRI P SHIVASHANKAR S/O R.PUTTANNA AGED 76 YEARS PROP.K.RAMANNA SONS & CO., 29, APMC YARD MYSORE-570 004 ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI A SHANKAR, ADV., AND SRI M LAVA, ADV.,) 2 THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.13742/2012 DATED 10/08/2012. THIS W.As. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, DILIP B. BHOSALE J. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PC: Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In the present appeal, the revenue has called in question the order dated 10th August 2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.13742/2012 whereby, the petition has been disposed of by the following order : “2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 24.02.2012 (Annexure-A) rejecting the claim made by the petitioner for grant of interest on the refund received by him. The rejection is based on instructionNo.13/2006 dated 22.12.2006. 3. In my opinion, respondent No.1 should have examined the claim for interest on the refund in the light of Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short). That exercise has not been done by respondent No.1. Therefore, the impugned order dated 24.02.2012 is set-aside. The matter is remitted to respondent No.1 for 3 reconsideration in accordance with law and in the light of Section 244A of the Act.” 3. Sri K.V.Aravind, learned counsel appearing for the revenue after inviting our attention to the annexures submitted that the respondent-assessee is not entitled for interest in the light of Instruction No.13 of 2006 dated 22-12-2006 and so also Section 244A of the Income Tax Act 1961. 4. We are not inclined to examine the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the revenue and we are satisfied that the following order shall meet the ends of justice: The Commissioner of Income Tax shall examine the claim for interest on the refund as per the order dated 10th August 2012 passed by the learned single Judge and while doing so, he may also consider whether the respondent-assessee is entitled for interest in the light of Instruction No.13 of 2006 and the provisions contained in Section 244A of the Act. It is needless to mention that the Commissioner shall pass orders only after giving an opportunity of hearing to the respondent-assessee. It is open to the respondent-assessee to contend that Instruction 4 No.13/2006, on the facts and circumstances of the case, is not applicable to deny interest to the assessee. We keep all contentions of the parties open. The Commissioner shall examine and decide the issue as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order. With these observations, the writ appeal is disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Ia "