Back
RAJIV SHAKDHER, GIRISH KATHPALIA
Ctc Geotechnical Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director of Income Tax Cpc Bangalore – Respondent
JUDGMENT
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
CM Appl.28876/2023
1. Allowed, subject to the petitioner filing legible copies of the annexures, at least three days before the next date of hearing.
W.P.(C) 7428/2023
2. Issue notice.
2.1. Mr Vipul Agarwal, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondents/revenue, accepts notice.
3. Given the directions that we propose to pass, Mr Agarwal says that he does not wish to file a counter-affidavit in the matter, and he will argue the matter based on the record presently available with the court.
3.1. Therefore, with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.
4. Ms Vibhooti Malhotra, who appears on behalf of the petitioner/assessee, says that the principal grievance of the petitioner is that the refund dues vis-a-vis Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23 amounting to Rs.82,08,971/-, inclusive of interest under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, "Act"], has been wrongly adjusted against illusory demand pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10.
4.1. For this purpose, our attent
The obligation of the Assessing Officer to pass a speaking order in response to the petitioner's communication regarding the reconciliation of refund figures.
Prompt addressing of rectification application for refund and timely remittance of refund amount if due.
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer must comply with the stipulated percentage of the disputed demand as per the relevant provisions ....
Timely disposal of rectification applications and examination of the viability of reliefs sought.
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 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 applied the principle that the revenue cannot recover more than 20% of the outstanding tax demand and emphasized the timely disposal of the appeal.
The court held that the best course is to remit matters to the Assessing Officer for a speaking order rather than filing for rectification when significant time has passed.
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
