Mol Corporation v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors

$~ 9 to 14 and 95 to 97 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +W.P.(C) 6791/2024 +W.P.(C) 1211/2024 +W.P.(C) 7553/2024 +W.P.(C) 7555/2024 +W.P.(C) 7810/2024 +W.P.(C) 8011/2024 +W.P.(C) 15905/2022 +W.P.(C) 15906/2022+W.P.(C) 7699/2024+W.P.(C) 7699/2024 MOL CORPORATION .....PetitionerThrough:Mr Nageshwar Rao and Mr Parth,Advocates.Advocates.versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS. .....RespondentsThrough:Mr Sanjay Kumar, SCC for the ITD.Mr Arnav Kumar, CGSC and MrTejas Kothari, Adv for UOI CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA O R D E R % 24.10.2024 1.Mr Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue submitsthat although, there has been some delay in processing the refunds in respectof seven years, the vouchers for refund pertaining to seven assessment years(AYs), as tabulated below, have since been handed over to the assessee: 2.He states that further refunds for the AY 2003-04 and 2004-05 arerequired to be processed. However, the same could not be processed onaccount of the technical issues regarding “challan migration”.3.We find that considerable time has already been granted to therespondent for processing the petitioner’s claim for refund. Moreover, theamount of refund computed does not take into account the full interest tillthe date of handing over the payment. The concerned officer is directed totake proper steps to compute the interest till the date of payment and refundthe same. The concerned officer is also directed to process the petitioner’sclaim for refund for the AY 2003-04 and 2004-05 as expeditiously aspossible, and in any case within a period of four weeks from date. 4.The petitions are disposed of in terms of the above. 5.List for compliance on 11.12.2024. VIBHU BAKHRU, J OCTOBER 24, 2024 M SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J Click here to check corrigendum, if any