Qualcomm Technologies, Inc v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle International Tax 3-1-1 & Ors
High Court
09 Feb 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle International Tax 3-1-1 & Ors
Date of order
09 Feb 2022
Assessment year(s)
2018-19
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Qualcomm Technologies, Inc v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle International Tax 3-1-1 & Ors, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Decision: 7.With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
$~60
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 2477/2022
QUALCOMM TECHNOLOGIES, INC
..... Petitioner
Through Ms.Ananya Kapoor, Advocate.
versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 3-1-1 & ORS.
..... Respondents
Through Mr.Puneet Rai, Advocate.
Date of Decision: 09[th] February, 2022
%
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHANHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
J U D G M E N T
MANMOHAN, J: (Oral)
C.M.No.7109/2022
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.2477/2022
1.The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2.Present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents to process the return of income, issue correct computation as well as issue refund along with up-to-date interest for the assessment year 2018-19.
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner states that no scrutiny assessment
NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/000522
was undertaken for the year under consideration. She states that the petitioner’s return of income has been processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). She, however, states that the processing is not in accordance with law. She also states that the petitioner is being denied the legitimate refund without any legal basis.
4.Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has filed a rectification application dated 28[th] May, 2020, which has not been decided till date.
5.Issue notice. Mr.Puneet Rai, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He states that there is a mismatch of the TDS certificate to the tune of Rs.11,78,811/-.
6.Since the deductor still has time to correct the TDS record, we grant liberty to the petitioner/assessee to approach the vendor. However, we direct the Assessing Officer to decide the petitioner’s rectification application dated 28[th] May, 2020 as well as grant TDS credit and issue refund along with up-to-date interest for the assessment year 2018-19 within twelve weeks.
7.With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
MANMOHAN, J
FEBRUARY 09, 2022 KA
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.