Rep. By Its Special Officer v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax – Ii, Race Course Road, Coimbatore – 641 018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN Writ Petition No.20542 of 2011 No.AA, 182, Erode Co-operative Building Society Limited, Rep. by its Special Officer,160, KNK Road, Thiru Nagar Colony,Erode – 638 003. ... PetitionerVs. The Commissioner of Income Tax – II,Race Course Road,Coimbatore – 641 018. ... Respondent Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India to issue Writ of Certiorarified mandamus,calling for the entire records relating to the impugned orderspassed by the respondent authority in his proceedings dated09.09.2009 and quash the same and consequently direct therespondent authority to order for the refund of the tax deductedat source amounting to Rs.4,03,519/-. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Premkumar For Respondent : Mr.A.N.R.Jayapratap Senior Standing counsel ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learnedSenior Standing Counsel for respondent. 2. The Central Board of Direct Tax has issued circular dated22.12.2006 under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 bearinginstruction number 13 of 2006. The said circular has modifiedthe then existing circular and has delegated the powers to passorders under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act forprocessing refund claims. The claim should belowRs.50,00,000/- for The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax toconsider and pass orders. Paras 3,4,5 & 6 of the said circularis hereunder: “3. The applications/claims under section119(2)(b) for condonation of delay involvingrefund claims exceeding Rs.50,00,000/- wouldcontinue to be processed by Central Board ofDirect Taxes, both for acceptance and rejection. 4. No fresh application for claim ofrefund will be entertained beyond six years fromthe end of the assessment year for which theapplication/claim is made. 5. The powers of acceptance/rejectionwithin the monetary limits delegated to theCCsIt/CsIT would be subject to the followingconditions:-(a) The refund has arisen as a result ofexcess tax deducted /collected at sourceandpayments of advance tax under the provisionof Chapters XVII-B, XVII-BB and XVII-Crespectively and the amount of refund does notexceed Rs.50,00,000 in respect of CCsIT andRs.10,00,000 in respect of CsIT for any oneassessment year. (b) The income of the assessee is notassessable in the hands of any other personunder any of the provisions of the Act; and (c) No interest will be admissible on thebelated refund claims.'' 3. The power has been given under the circular to the ChiefCommissioner of Income Tax for refund of amount not exceedingRs.50,00,000/-. The Circular also makes it clear that nointerest will be admissible in case of belated refund claims.While A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in SitaldasK.Motwani -Vs- Director-General of Income-Tax and others, hasalso considered this circular and has remitted back to theauthority to consider the question of hardship as well as thecorrectness and genuineness of the refund claim. 4. Considering the aforesaid decision, I am of the view thatthis case also should be remitted back to the respondent to passappropriate order, keeping in mind, the purpose of circularissued under section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 byconstruing it liberally. Impugned order is thus set aside andthe case is remitted back to the respondent. The respondentshall pass appropriate order within a period of three monthsfrom the date of receipt of copy of this order. This writ petition is disposed with the observation. No costs. s/d- Assistant Registrar(CO) True Copy Sub-Assistant RegistrardrlToThe Commissioner of Income Tax – II,Race Course Road,Coimbatore – 641 018.+1 CC to Mr.A.P. Srinivas, Advocate sr 106472. W.P.No.20542 of 2011NMI(CO)SP(04/02/2020) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/