Krbl Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 13(1),Delhi & Ors

$~54 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 14767/2022 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),DELHI & ORS..... RespondentsDELHI & ORS..... Respondents ..... Respondents Through:Mr.A.Renganath, Advocate for Mr.Ajit Sharma, Sr.Standing Counselfor the Revenue.for 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.45401/2022 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) No.14767/2022 1.Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to theRespondents to issue refund of Rs.24,03,89,270/- along with up-to-dateinterest to the Petitioner pursuant to appeal effect order dated 05[th]April,2021 arising out of order of CIT(A) as well as pass appeal effect orderRespondents to issue refund of Rs.24,03,89,270/- along with up-to-dateinterest to the Petitioner pursuant to appeal effect order dated 05[th]April,2021 arising out of order of CIT(A) as well as pass appeal effect order pursuant to order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) dated 09[th]May, 2022 and issue additional refund of Rs.9,96,10,730/- along with up-to-date interest. 2.Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the ITAT deleted all theadditions and ruled in favour of the Petitioner and the Petitioner is nowentitled to a refund of the entire tax paid under protest aggregating toRs.34,00,00,000/-(alongwithapplicableinterestunderSection244A/244A(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’). 3.He states that the Petitioner made several representations to theRespondents but to no avail. He submits that non-issuance of refund is inviolation of Article 265 of the Constitution of India and also against Section237 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 have 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 of the appeal order. 6.Keeping in view the limited relief sought in the present writ petition,the same is disposed of along with pending application with a direction tothe Respondents-revenue to consider:- (i)Issue of refund of Rs.24,03,89,270/- along with up-to-date interest tothe Petitioner pursuant to appeal effect order dated 05[th]April, 2021arising out of order of CIT(A); andthe Petitioner pursuant to appeal effect order dated 05[th]April, 2021arising out of order of CIT(A); and Signature Not Verified (ii)Appeal effect order pursuant to order of the ITAT dated 09[th]May,2022 and issue additional refund of Rs. 9,96,10,730/- along with up-to-date interest, in accordance with law.2022 and issue additional refund of Rs. 9,96,10,730/- 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.made within the said period of six weeks. The rights and contentions of allthe parties are left open. MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J OCTOBER 19, 2022KA W.P.(C) No.14767/2022