Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rajiv Shakdher, Tara Vitasta Ganju, JJ.
PTC India Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 19 1, New Delhi - Respondent
W.P.(C) 17621 of 2022 & CM Appls. 56356-57 of 2022
Decided On : 23-12-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court directions for expeditious order issuance. (Para 1 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. notice and acceptance for hearings without counter-affidavit. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. direction to give effect to prior orders and grant refunds. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. closure of pending applications and reliance on digitally signed copies. (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
CM No.56357/2022
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) 17621/2022 & CM No.56356/2022 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief]
2. Issue notice to the respondents/revenue.
3. Mr Ruchir Bhatia accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue.
4. In view of the direction that we propose to pass, Mr Bhatia says that a counter-affidavit need not be filed. Therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at this stage itself.
5. The substantive prayers made in the writ petition read as follows:
"(a) A writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, direction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India directing the Respondent to pass the order giving effect under Section 153 of the Act pursuant to the order dated 26.09.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 250 of the Act.
(b) A writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, direction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India directing the Respondent No. 1 grant refund pursuant to order giving effect along with interest under Section 244A of the Act."
6. A perusal of the relief sought for would show that all that the petitioner seeks is issuance of a direction to give effect to the order dated 26.09.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, "CIT(A)"] and to grant consequential relief.
6.1. The consequential relief sought is, for grant of refund with applicable rate of interest as provided under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, "Act"].
7. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/revenue to pass an appeal effect order under Section 153 of the Act.
8. The order will be passed as expeditiously as possible, though, not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order passed today.
9. While passing the order, the concerned officer will also bear in mind the relief sought by the petitioner in prayer clause (b) of the petition which is extracted hereinabove.
10. Consequently, the pending application shall stand closed.
11. The parties will act, based on the digitally signed copy of the order passed today.
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.
The court ruled on the application of Articles 226 and 227 regarding interim tax relief, emphasizing that disputed tax demands require careful judicial consideration and timely hearings.
The court's decision was based on the plea that the respondents have to give effect to the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the concerned Assessment Years.
Pending appeals must be addressed prior to full recovery of tax demands, but negligence by the petitioner can negate claims for relief.
The court emphasized the importance of the Commissioner of Income Tax to dispose of the petitioner's application and accord a personal hearing, and allowed filing of written submissions. It also prov....
A director may seek to challenge a tax recovery order through a writ petition, allowing subsequent rights to appeal through revision without limitation concerns.
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.
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
