Back
RAJIV SHAKDHER, GIRISH KATHPALIA
AB Sciex Pte Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Circle Int. Tax 1-1-1, Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 23007/2023
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 5861/2023
2. This writ petition concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13.
3. Issue notice.
3.1. Mr Sunil Agarwal, senior standing counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue.
4. Given the order that we propose to pass, Mr Agarwal says he does not wish to file a counter-affidavit in the mater and that he will argue the matter based on the record presently available with the court.
5. Therefore, with the consent of the counsels for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.
6. The principal grievance of the petitioner is articulated, in a sense, in the substantive prayer made in the writ petition. Thus, for the sake of convenience, the substantive prayer made in the writ petition is culled out hereafter:
"a. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or certiorari or any other appropriate writ(s), order(s), appropriate writ(s), order(s), directing the Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 4 to credit the refund amounting to Rs.1,04,27,661 for AY 2018-19 and Rs.95,36,760
The obligation of the Assessing Officer to pass a speaking order in response to the petitioner's communication regarding the reconciliation of refund figures.
The court has the authority to direct the revenue to remit disputed refund amounts and grant liberty to file a rectification application for differences in refund amounts under the Income Tax Act, 19....
The court reinforced the obligation of the revenue to execute prior orders from tax appellate authorities and to ensure timely refunds as mandated by law.
Prompt addressing of rectification application for refund and timely remittance of refund amount if due.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of expeditious disposal of appeals and compliance with court directions in matters related to refunds and recovery proceedings.
The court emphasized the importance of following the regime set forth in Section 245 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and upheld the petitioner's right to seek an appropriate remedy if aggrieved by the d....
Interest on refunds is warranted from the date of valid application in cases where the authority does not contest the claim, reinforcing the principle of compensation for delayed access to owed funds....
The court mandated the Central Board of Direct Taxes to designate an officer responsible for processing the petitioner's refund request under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act.
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
