Evalueserve.com Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 7(1) Delhi &Ors
High Court
01 Apr 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Evalueserve.com Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 7(1) Delhi &Ors
Date of order
01 Apr 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Evalueserve.com Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 7(1) Delhi &Ors, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 1642/2024
EVALUESERVE.COM PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv.
versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(1) DELHI &ORS ..... Respondents
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Menon, JSC for Mr. Zoheb Hossain, SSC.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMAHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
O R D E R01.04.2024
%
1.We note that the principal controversy which stands raised in the present writ petition stood encapsulated in our order of 05 February 2024 which is reproduced hereinbelow:-
“1. The instant writ petition has been preferred for refund of the deposits which were made by the petitioner while pursuing appellate remedies.
2. It is pointed out by learned counsel that a direction was lastly framed by the Dispute Resolution Panel [“DRP”] on 05 February 2021. Consequent to the order of remit which was framed by the DRP, although the Transfer Pricing Officer [“TPO”] passed an order on 18 March 2021, it is the case of the writ petitioner that no draft order of assessment has been framed thereafter. It is in the aforesaid backdrop that the claim for refund is sought.
3. We consequently request, Mr. Menon, learned counsel appearing for the respondents to obtain instructions.
4. Let the petition be called again on 12 February 2024.”
2.Although we had granted time to Mr. Menon, learned counsel appearing for the respondents to obtain instructions, we are apprised
today that no assessment order appears to have been framed on or before 31 March 2021 by the Assessing Officer in terms of the order dated 18 March 2021 passed by the Transfer Pricing Officer. In view of the aforesaid undisputed position, it would be the return as submitted by the writ petitioner which would prevail.
3.We accordingly allow and dispose of the instant writ petition and frame a direction to the respondents to duly examine the claim for refund as raised in the writ petition and to pass appropriate consequential orders within a period of six weeks from today. The refund, if granted, shall be along with interest which is statutorily payable.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
APRIL 01, 2024 RW
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.