Krbl Limited v. Deputy Commissioner Of Incometax Circle 13(1), Delhi And Ors

Signature Not Verified $~16 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 14964/2022 and CM APPL. 46137/2022 KRBL LIMITED ..... PetitionerThrough :Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Advocate. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX CIRCLE 13(1), DELHI AND ORS ..... RespondentsThrough :Mr. Ajit Sharma, Senior StandingCounselforRevenuealongwithMr.A.Renganath, Advocate. Date of Decision: 28[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 (ORAL): CM APPL. 46137/2022 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 14964/2022 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 as well as to issuerefund of Rs.16,45,98,588/- along with up-to-date interest and issue interestof Rs.1,14,76,268/-, after giving effect to the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year 2013-14, asadditional amount due to the Petitioner. 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. She states that the Petitioner isnow entitled to a refund of remaining taxes paid under protest amounting toRs.16,45,98,588/-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 counselaccepts notice on behalf of the Respondents-Revenue.He states that theRevenue is in 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 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 the appeal order. 6.Keeping in view the limited prayer sought in the present writ petition,the same is disposed of with a direction to the Respondents-Revenue toconsider:- (i)Issue of refund of Rs.16,45,98,588/- along with up-to-date interestto the Petitioner;to the Petitioner; (ii)Issue of interest of Rs.1,14,76,268/- after giving effect to the orderof CIT(A) for AY 2013-14 as additional amount due to thePetitioner.of CIT(A) for AY 2013-14 as additional amount due to thePetitioner. 7.The necessary appeal effect orders and payments of refunds shall bemade within a period of six weeks. The rights and contentions of all theparties are left open. MANMOHAN, J OCTOBER 28, 2022 j MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J