Back
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TARA VITASTA GANJU
Oyo Hotels And Homes Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Tara Vitasta Ganju, J. The present Petition has been filed seeking directions for disbursal of a refund amount of Rs.31,48,42,701/- along with applicable interest for the Assessment Year (AY) 2020-2021. The Petitioner's only grievance is that despite its refund being determined and an intimation thereof being given to the Petitioner, the same has not been remitted as yet.
2. The following broad facts are required to be noticed for adjudication of this Writ Petition:
2.1. The Petitioner filed a return of Income Tax for AY 2020-2021 declaring a loss of Rs.16,13,83,22,476/- and claimed a refund of Rs.31,46,26,494/- on account of tax deducted at source under Section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter "the Act"]. Pursuant to a de-merger and to give effect to the Scheme of Arrangement, the Petitioner filed a revised return of Income Tax for AY 2020-2021 on 27.03.2021 [hereinafter "Revised Return"] declaring a loss of Rs.16,70,16,05,998/- and claiming a refund of Rs.43,91,40,294/-.
2.2. The Petitioner was subjected to a scrutiny assessment under Section 143(2) of the Act by notice dated 29.06.2021 which was responded to by the Petitioner with all the necessary clarifica
The main legal point established is that the withholding of a refund under Section 241A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 requires detailed and compelling reasons to be recorded in writing, and the exercis....
Authorities must provide cogent reasons for withholding tax refunds, with mere pending assessments not sufficient justification under the Income Tax Act.
Point of law: the law declared by the highest court in the State is binding on authorities or Tribunals under its superintendence, and that they cannot ignore it either in initiating proceeding or de....
The estimation of tax liability should be rational and founded on cogent grounds, taking into account the financial wherewithal of the assessee and consistent application of accounting policy.
Income Tax – Refund – Attachment before judgment – Power of Court -When Court not been empowered to assess tax liability in first instance, it would ordinarily not form a prima facie view even, of wh....
The main legal point established is that the refund under the DVAT Act should be processed within the stipulated period, and interest is payable from the date the refund was due to be paid.
Assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act cannot be initiated until previously filed returns are disposed of by a final order.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the words 'amount of refund' in Section 244A(1)(a) must be given their natural meaning, entitling the appellant to interest on the whole refun....
The court emphasized that orders passed by administrative or quasi-judicial authorities are required to stand or fall on their own and subsequent explanations by way of affidavit(s) cannot be permitt....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
