Krbl Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income

Signature Not Verified $~96 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 15068/2022 KRBL LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through :Ms. Ananya Kapoor with Mr.SumitLalchandani, Advocates. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 13(1), DELHI AND ORS ..... RespondentsThrough :Mr. Ajit Sharma, Senior StandingCounselforRevenuealongwithMr.A.Renganath, Advocate. %Date of Decision: 01[st]November, 2022 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (ORAL): CM APPL. 46553/2022 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 15068/2022 1.Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to theRespondents to issue the refund of Rs.15,03,89,270/- along with up-to-dateinterest being admittedly due to the Petitioner pursuant to appeal effect orderdated 05[th]April, 2021 arising out of order of CIT(A), pass the appeal effectRespondents to issue the refund of Rs.15,03,89,270/- along with up-to-dateinterest being admittedly due to the Petitioner pursuant to appeal effect orderdated 05[th]April, 2021 arising out of order of CIT(A), pass the appeal effect Signature Not Verified order pursuant to ITAT order dated 09[th]May, 2022 as well as issueadditional refund of Rs.17,96,10,730/- along with up-to-date interest and torelease the refund of Rs.60,00,000/- seized at the time of search along withup-to-date interest due to the Petitioner pursuant to the ITAT order dated09[th]May, 2022. 2.Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the ITAT vide orderdated 09[th]May, 2022, decided all issues in favour of the Petitioner and theentire additions were deleted. She states that the Petitioner is now entitled toarefundofremainingtaxespaidunderprotestamountingtoRs.33,00,00,000/-alongwithapplicableinterestunderSections244A/244A(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’). 3.Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner has filedletters dated 20[th]May, 2022 and 11[th]July, 2022 with the Respondents forpassing of an appeal effect order pursuant to the ITAT order and also forrelease of refunds legally due to the Petitioner, but to no avail. She submitsthat non-issuance of refund is in violation of Article 265 of the Constitutionof India and also against Sections 237 and 240 of the Act. 4.Issue notice. Mr.Ajit Sharma, learned senior standing counsel acceptsnotice on behalf of the Respondents-Revenue. He states that the Revenue isin the process of filing an appeal against the order of the ITAT. 5.Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the viewthat the Respondents-Revenue has had sufficient time to file an appealagainst the order of the ITAT. In any event, in accordance with the mandateof law, the appeal effect order has to be passed within three months ofpassing the appeal order. Signature Not Verified 6.Keeping in view the limited prayer sought in the present writ petition,the same is disposed of along with the pending application with a directionto the Respondents-Revenue to consider:- (i)Issue of refund of Rs.15,03,89,270/- along with up-to-date interestbeing admittedly due to the Petitioner pursuant to appeal effectorder dated 05[th]April, 2021 arising out of order of CIT(A);being admittedly due to the Petitioner pursuant to appeal effectorder dated 05[th]April, 2021 arising out of order of CIT(A); (ii) Passing an appeal effect order pursuant to ITAT order dated 09[th]May, 2022; andMay, 2022; and (iii) Issue additional refund of Rs.17,96,10,730/- along with up-to-dateinterest.interest. 7.The necessary appeal effect order and payments of refunds shall bemade within a period of six weeks. The rights and contentions of all theparties are left open. MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J NOVEMBER 01, 2022KA