Anand Cine Service v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,Non Corporate Circle

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED :01.12.2015 Anand Cine Service Petitioner Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Non Corporate Circle 20, Aayakar Bhavan,121, MG Road, Chennai 600 034. Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct therespondent to refund the amount of Rs.5,78,424/- which has beenwrongly adjusted from the refunds due to the petitioner for theassessment year 2009-10, along with the interest due thereonunder section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner andMr.T. Pramodkumar Chopda, learned Additional Government Pleader(T), who took notice for the respondent and with their consent,the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admissionstage itself. 2.The writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India to direct the respondent to refund theamount of Rs.5,78,424/- which has been wrongly adjusted from therefunds due to the petitioner for the assessment year 2009-10,along with the interest due thereon under section 244A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961. 3. The petitioner is a partnership firm involved in thebusiness of leasing of film equipments and has been assessedwith the respondent department. For the assessment year 1990-91, the respondent passed the assessment order assessingpetitioner's total income as Rs.17,58,450/- on 1.2.1993,against which, the petitioner preferred appeal before theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. The said appeal was partly allowed on 16.4.1993 by theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Thereafter on 21.4.1993,an order was passed by the assessing officer, giving effect tothe order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).Subsequently, on 23.8.1993, the respondent passed an order underSection 154 of Income Tax Act revising the total income andaccordingly calculated the total tax payable at Rs.7,14,777/-. 5. By a letter dated 13.10.1993, the respondent has adjusteda refund due to Mrs.Manoramma, a sum of Rs.40,653/- towardsdemands due from the petitioner for the said assessment year.Thereafter the respondent claimed through its letter dated18.3.1994, the arrears of income tax amounting to Rs.1,99,803/-from the petitioner for the assessment year 1990-1991. Forthat, the petitioner replied through its letter dated 01.04.1994specifically pointing out that the total tax payable by thepetitioner for the said assessment year was only Rs.2,23,667/-after giving effect to the order of the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals). 6. According to the petitioner, though the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals) has passed its order on 16.4.1993, settingaside certain issues, the respondent has till date, not takenany steps towards re-examining such issues set aside by theAppellate Authority. But to the shock and surprise ofpetitioner, in form 26AS relating to assessment year 2012-2013,a sum of Rs.7,14,780/- has been erroneously adjusted against apurported demand for the assessment year 1990-91. The taxpayable for the assessment year 1990-91 after giving effect tothe order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was only a sumof Rs.2,23,667/- and after adjusting payments made earlier, thebalance due as against the demand for the assessment year 1990-91 is only a sum of Rs.1,36,356/- and by adjustingRs.7,14,780/- as demand due for assessment year 1990-91, therespondent adjusted an excess amount of Rs.5,78,424/-. Thepetitioner, on 10.7.2015, pointing out the above erroneousadjustment, sent a representation to the respondent for refundof Rs.5,78,424/- . The grievance of the petitioner is thatinspite of efflux of time and inspite of constant requests, norefund whatsoever has been made for the assessment year 2009-2010. Hence the petitioner is before this Court. 7. During the course of the argument, the learned counselfor the petitioner submitted that refund claim made by thepetitioner be considered by the respondent and it would sufficeif a direction is given to the respondent to dispose of therepresentation of the petitioner after verifying the backfiles, within a stipulated time fixed by this Court. 8. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed ofby directing the respondent to consider the representation dated10.7.2015 of the petitioner with regard to refund claim and passappropriate orders, after verifying the back files. It is madeclear that the petitioner is directed to produce copies of allthe relevant records along with a copy of this order within aperiod of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of thisorder and on receipt of the same, the respondent is directed toconsider the same after verifying the back files and passappropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, withina period of eight weeks thereafter. No costs. 9. The Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms.Consequently, the connected M.P.No.1 of 2015 is closed.msr -s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) True Copy Sub-Assistant RegistrarTo The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,Non Corporate Circle 20,Aayakar Bhavan,121, MG Road, Chennai 600 034. + 1 cc to Mr.Arunkarthik Mohan, Advocate SR 65218+ 1 cc to Spl. Govt.Pleader SR 65550nm(co)prk6/1