Krbl Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 13(1)

$~46 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 14590/2022 KRBL LIMITED..... Petitioner Through:Mr.Salil Kapoor with Mr.SumitLalchandani, Ms.Ananya Kapoor andMr.Tarun Chanana, Advocates.Lalchandani, Ms.Ananya Kapoor andMr.Tarun Chanana, Advocates. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 13(1) & ORS..... Respondents Through:Mr.A.Renganath, Advocate forMr.Ajit Sharma, Sr.Standing Counselfor the Revenue.Mr.Ajit Sharma, Sr.Standing Counselfor the Revenue. % Date of Decision: 19[th]October, 2022 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANHON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J: C.M.No.44725/2022 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) No.14590/2022 1.Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to theRespondents to pass the appeal effect order pursuant to the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal (‘ ITAT’) order dated 09[th]May, 2022 and to issue refundof Rs.11,56,81,040/- along with up-to-date interest as well as issue short interest of Rs.1,74,91,170/- received from the Respondents after givingeffect to the order of CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2010-11 and torelease the refund of Rs. 60,00,000/- seized at the time of search along withup-to-date interest being due to the Petitioner pursuant to the ITAT orderdated 09[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, thus allowing the appeal of the Petitioner anddismissing the appeal of the Respondents. He states that the Petitioner isnow entitled to a refund of remaining taxes paid under protest amounting toRs.11,56,81,040/-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. He 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.A.Renganath, Advocate accepts notice on behalf ofthe Respondents-Revenue. He states that the Revenue is in the process offiling 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 had sufficient time to file an appeal againstthe order of the ITAT. In any event, in accordance with the mandate of law,the appeal effect order has to be passed within three months of passing theappeal order. 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.11,56,81,040/- along with up-to-date interestto the Petitioner;to the Petitioner; (ii)Issue of short interest payment of Rs.1,74,91,170/- to the Petitionerafter giving effect to the order of CIT(A) for the Assessment Year2010-11; andafter giving effect to the order of CIT(A) for the Assessment Year2010-11; and (iii)Release of refund of Rs.60,00,000/- to the Petitioner, seized at thetime of search along with up-to-date interest, in accordance withtime of search along with up-to-date interest, in accordance with law. 7.The necessary appeal effect orders and payments of refunds shall bemade within the said period of six weeks. The rights and contentions of allthe parties are left open. MANMOHAN, J OCTOBER 19, 2022KA MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J