M/S.narayanan Chettiar Industries Rep. By Its v. The Income Tax Officer Non-Corporate Ward 12(1) Chennai-600 006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS M/s.Narayanan Chettiar IndustriesRep. by its Partner Mr.Rm.Subramaniyam14, Davidson Street,Chennai-600 001....Petitionervs. 1.The Income Tax OfficerNon-Corporate Ward 12(1)Chennai-600 006. 2.The Joint Commissioner of Income TaxNon-Corporate Range 12Room No.215, Wing 2nd Floor, Tower-2BSNL Building, No.16, Greams Road,Chennai-600 006. ...Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India praying to issue a Writ ofMandamus, directing the respondents to refund the amountof Rs.15,18,650/- for the assessment year 1990-1991 andany excess interest collected U/s.220 along withstatutory interest U/s.244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961from the date of determination of the refund, till thedate of issue of refund and further, pay compensation forthe inordinate delay in granting the refund. The petitioner seeks for a mandamus directing therespondents to refund the amount of Rs.15,18,650/- for https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the assessment year 1990-1991 and any excess interestcollected U/s.220 along with statutory interest U/s.244Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 from the date ofdetermination of the refund, till the date of issue ofrefund and further, pay compensation for the inordinatedelay in granting the refund. 2. The case of the petitioner, in short, is asfollows: For the assessment year 1990-1991, the assessmentwas completed under Section 143(3) r/w 147 of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (for brevity "the IT Act") and a demandwas raised for a sum of Rs.63,23,528/-. The petitionerfiled an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Chennai, who in turn vide order dated03.02.2000 held that a portion of the lands are notliable to tax and the rest should be assessed as ShortTerm Capital Gains and thus, remitted the matter to theAssessing Officer. The petitioner took up the matterfurther by way of appeal to the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Chennai. The Tribunal, vide orders dated14.05.2001 & 01.10.2001, held that the profit on sale ofnon-agricultural lands should be assessed as Long TermCapital Gains and not the Short Term Capital Gains andhowever, upheld the order of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) in remanding the matter. Thereafter, the firstrespondent passed an order dated 02.12.2002 under Section143(3) r/w 254 to give effect to the order of theTribunal and reduced the demand to Rs.40,78,567/-. Thepetitioner challenged the same before the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals), Chennai, who partly allowed theappeal, vide order dated 20.12.2006. The firstrespondent passed the giving effect order dated29.03.2007 to the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), thereby reducing the demand to Rs.20,49,872/-.In the meantime, the first respondent certified thearrears of demand including interest for the assessmentyear 1990-1991 to the Tax Recovery Officer to recover theamounts from the petitioner on various dates. Since thedemand raised by various orders passed by the AssessingOfficer was already recovered and since the demand wasconsiderably reduced, the petitioner requested the firstrespondent to refund the excess amount. The respondentreworked the interest under Sections 220 and 224 of theIT Act and refunded the amount of Rs.96,90,242/-including the statutory interest, thereby reducing thedemand to Rs.20,49,872/- for the assessment year 1990-1991. The petitioner filed a further appeal against thegiving effect order dated 29.03.2007 before theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), and the same was allowed in favour of the petitioner vide order dated26.04.2011. Thereafter, a giving effect order dated08.06.2011 was passed by the Assessing Officer to theorder of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated26.04.2011, wherein the demand of Rs.20,49,872/- wasreduced to Rs.5,31,202/-. It is stated that no appealwas filed by the Revenue against the order dated26.04.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals). Therefore, the issue attained its finalityand the Revenue owes an amount of Rs.15,18,670/- towardsexcess tax collected, being the difference arising onaccount of the reduced demand together with statutoryinterest and also the excess interest collected underSection 220 of the IT Act. Therefore, the petitionerseeks for refund of the said sum of Rs.15,18,670/- as theexcess tax collected from the petitioner. Since therequest of the petitioner for refund of Rs.15,18,670/-was not considered inspite of several reminders, thepresent writ petition is filed with the relief as statedsupra. 3. When the writ petition was taken up for admissionon 04.09.2019, Mr.J.Narayanasamy, learned standingcounsel (IT) took notice for the respondents and soughttime to get instructions. Accordingly, the matter islisted today for further hearing. 4. The learned standing counsel for the respondentstoday produced a communication dated 19.09.2019 issued bythe Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 12(1), Chennaiaddressed to the learned Senior Standing Counsel,Chennai, wherein, it is stated as follows:"On a perusal of records ofM/s.Narayanan Chettiar (hereinaftercalled the assessee), it is noticed thatas much as Rs.96,90,240/- being therefund and interest payable thereon forthe A.Ys.1990-91 and 1992-93 was issuedand the assessee claims that part of therefund for the A.Y.1992-93 is yet to bereceived by it.In this regard, it is pertinent tomention that original records are notavailable in this case and even thereconstructed records contain partialinformation only. Even the consequentialorders giving effect to appellate orderscontaining details of tax creditsallowed are not available, which is crucial to arrive at the balance sum tobe refunded. In order to mitigate thehardship of the assessee, a request toM/s.Writers Information which is thecustodian of our old records to traceout any correspondence or copies oforders etc available, if any, and theirreply is awaited. Further, the assesseewill also be requested to provide anyother papers relating to the impugnedissue so that necessary action can betaken up without further loss of time. In this regard, it is assured thatthe assessee would be paid the refunddue to it along with necessary interestat the earliest after obtaining relevantinformation either from the assessee orfrom M/s.Writers Information.In view of the above, it isrequested that the Hon'ble Court may bepleased to not to take any adverse viewand grant time of four weeks to attendto the grievance of the assessee onpriority basis." 5. By citing the above written instructions, thelearned standing counsel for the respondents submittedthat the request of the petitioner for refund of the sumof Rs.15,18,670/- will be considered and the amount willbe refunded to the petitioner within a period of fourweeks. In this regard, it is assured thatthe assessee would be paid the refunddue to it along with necessary interestat the earliest after obtaining relevantinformation either from the assessee orfrom M/s.Writers Information.In view of the above, it isrequested that the Hon'ble Court may bepleased to not to take any adverse viewand grant time of four weeks to attendto the grievance of the assessee onpriority basis." 5. By citing the above written instructions, thelearned standing counsel for the respondents submittedthat the request of the petitioner for refund of the sumof Rs.15,18,670/- will be considered and the amount willbe refunded to the petitioner within a period of fourweeks. 6. Considering the above stated facts andcircumstances and considering the fact that the aboveclaim made by the petitioner for refund of the sum ofRs.15,18,670/- is not disputed by the respondents and onthe other hand, the respondents seek four weeks time torefund the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of, byrecording the above stand taken by the respondents, alsowith further direction to the respondents to refund thesaid sum of Rs.15,18,670/- along with appropriateinterest within a period of four weeks from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order. No costs.Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(insp cell) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ mkTo1.The Income Tax OfficerNon-Corporate Ward 12(1)Chennai-600 006.2.The Joint Commissioner of Income TaxNon-Corporate Range 12Room No.215, Wing 2nd Floor, Tower-2BSNL Building, No.16, Greams Road,Chennai-600 006.+1cc to M/s.J.Sreevidya , Advocate SR.No. 78693W.P.No.25266 of 2019A.SK(01/10/2019)