SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Qualcomm Incorporated - Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Respondent
W.P.(C) 1666 of 2022 & CM Appl. 4800 of 2022 with W.P.(C) 1670 of 2022 & CM Appl. 4804 of 2022 with W.P.(C) 1686 of 2022 & CM Appl. 4840 of 2022 with W.P.(C) 1687 of 2022 & CM Appl. 4841 of 2022
Decided On : 28-01-2022




The court reaffirmed that income tax refunds must be issued as per binding ITAT orders, emphasizing the essentiality of compliance with directions for timely processing and rectification under Article 265.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 265 - Income Tax Act - Refunds and rectification of assessment - Petitioner sought processing of income tax returns and issuance of refunds with interest for assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13 - Petitioner denied TDS credit without legal basis, based on ITAT orders - Court directed issuance of refunds and rectification orders by the Assessing Officer within stipulated timelines. (Paras 2-5)

(B) Authority of ITAT - Binding nature of ITAT orders on assessing authorities and compliance responsibilities. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)--The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing.

2. By way of the present petitions, Petitioner seeks directions to the Respondents to process the returns of income,issue correct computations and process as well as issue refunds along with up to date interest for assessment years 2009-10,2010-11,2011-12 and 2012-13.

3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that even after completion of the entire proceedings and despite specific, binding and favorable orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (`ITAT') for the years under consideration and appeal effect orders dated 8th August, 2018, the Petitioner is being denied legitimate TDS credit and refunds without any legal basis. In support of her contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon Article 265 of the Constitution, decision of the Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India, [1997] 5 SCC 536 and decision of this Court in Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, W.P.(C) 10373/2019.

4. Issue notice. Mr.Puneet Rai, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents.He states that the Assessing Officer has passed rectification orders with regard to the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 yesterday. He further states that refund for the assessment year 2012-13 was adjusted against the demand for the assessment year 2008-09.He candidly states that matter for assessment year 2008-09 has been decided by the ITAT and the Assessing Officer shall pass the appeal effect order within the time granted by the statute. He lastly states that the rectification order for the assessment year 2011-12 shall be passed shortly.

5. Keeping in view the aforesaid,this Court disposes of the present writ petitions and pending applications with the following directions:

i) The Assessing Officer is directed to issue refunds along with up to date interest for the assessment years 2009-10 and2010-11 within six weeks.

ii) The Assessing Officer is directed to pass a rectification order and issue refund,if any, with up to date interest for the assessment year 2011-12 within ten weeks.

iii) The Assessing Officer is directed to pass an appeal effect order as well as pay refund, if any, with up to date interest for the assessment year 2012-13 within twelve weeks.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top