Wp/39496/2022 Of M/S. Sahrudaya Health Care Private Limited v. The Director Of Income Tax (Cpc- Tr)
High Court
09 Jan 2023 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/39496/2022 Of M/S. Sahrudaya Health Care Private Limited v. The Director Of Income Tax (Cpc- Tr)
Date of order
09 Jan 2023
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Wp/39496/2022 Of M/S. Sahrudaya Health Care Private Limited v. The Director Of Income Tax (Cpc- Tr), the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: In view of above, \(/rit Petition is dismissed c,l u,ithdrawalwith libenyas rrayed for.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
I
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE TELANGANA (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION NO: 39496 OF [2022]
Between:
M/s. Sahrudaya Health Care Private Limited, Plgt Nq 5 [to ][11, Survey ][No.78,]Pakika Nagar, Madhapur, Hyderabad- 500081. [Telangana, ][Rep. ][by ][its]Managing Director Sri. Anil Krishna Gundala, [S/o Sri. ][Hanuman ][Reddy]Gundala. aged about [45years.]
...PETITIONER
AND
1The Director of lncome Tax [(CPC- ]TR), Central [Processing ][Centre, lncome]Tax Department, Bengaluru -560500, Karnataka.Tax Department, Bengaluru -560500, Karnataka.
2The Principal Commissioner of lncome [Tax-1, 7th ][Floor, l.T.Towers,]A.C.Guards, Hyderabad-500004A.C.Guards, Hyderabad-500004
3The Additional Commissioner of [lncome ][Tax- Range ][3, ][7th ][Floor, Signature]Towers, Kondapur Road, Hyderabad [-500084, T.S.]Towers, Kondapur Road, Hyderabad [-500084, T.S.]
4. The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, [Circle ][3(1), ][Room ][No714, ][7th]Floor,Sign-ature Towers, Kondapur [Road, Hyderabad -500084, ][T.S]Floor,Sign-ature Towers, Kondapur [Road, Hyderabad -500084, ][T.S]
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution [of ][lndia ][praying ][that ][in ][the]circumstances stated in the affidavit [filed ][therewith, ][the ][High Court may ][be]pleased to pass an order or direction, especially one in the [nature of WRIT ] MANDAMUS holding that [(i) ]the action of [the ][1st ][Respondent ][in ][adjusting ][the]refund of Rs.6, 14,54,400 due to the Petitioner [for ][assessmenl ][yeat ][2021-22]against the alleged demands outstanding [for ][assessment ][years ][2014-15 ][and]2017 -18 as being illegal, arbitrary [and ][against ][the ][provisions ][of ][the Act, ] Circular and their own [order ][granting ][stay and ][set ][aside ][the ][same, ][and]consequently direct the Respondents [to forthwith issue refund ][of ][Rs 6,14,54,400]to the Petitioner along with [interest and ][(ii) ][the ][action ][of ][the 1st ][Respondent]
withholding refund rf Rs.12,43,04,410 [due to ][the ][Petitioner ft ][t ][ass':ssment ][year]2O2O-21 for being [? ]djusted against [the taxes ][allegedly ][due ][for ][assessment years]2014-15 and 2018-19 as being [illegal, arbitrary and against ][tte ][provisions of ][the]Act, CBDT Circula and their [own ][order granting ][stay, and ][(:orlsequently ][direct]the 1st Responden. to forthwith [refund the amount ][of ][Rs.12,''il ][04,410.00 to ][the]Petitioner along wrt t tnterest.
lA NO: 1 OF 2022
Petition und( r Order 39 Rule ['1 ]& 2 of Section [151 ] f,raying [that ][in ][the]circumstances stat:d in the affidavit [filed ][in ][support ][of ][the ][petition, ][the ][High]Court may be plea;ed to restrain the [Respondents ][from ][adjl ][s;trng ][the ][refund of]Rs. 12.43,04,410.0 ) due to the [Petitioner ][for ][assessment ][yeat ][20120-21 ][against]the taxes allegedly due for assessment [years ][2014-15 ][and ][2C18-19 ][which ][are]either [paid ]or apperrring erroneously or [stayed by ][the ][Revenut,.]
Counsel for the Pe:itioner : SRl. A V RAGHU
Counsel forthe Re;pondents : Ms. SAPNA SRl. J V PRASAD (SC FOR lt\CrlME TAX)
The Court made th ) following [: ]
\
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF IUSTICI] UIIAL BHUYANAND
THE HON'BLE SRI II]STICE N.TUKARAMII
W.P.No..19.196 of 2022
Fleard Mr. AV.Raghu Ram, leamed counsel for the
petitioner and Ms. Sapna Reddy, leamed counsel represenringMr. J.V.Prasad, leamed Standing Cor.rsel, Income Tax Departmentfor the respondents.
2. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of theC-onstitution of India prayng for the following reliefs:
Counsel for the Pe:itioner : SRl. A V RAGHU
Counsel forthe Re;pondents : Ms. SAPNA SRl. J V PRASAD (SC FOR lt\CrlME TAX)
The Court made th ) following [: ]
\
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF IUSTICI] UIIAL BHUYANAND
THE HON'BLE SRI II]STICE N.TUKARAMII
W.P.No..19.196 of 2022
Fleard Mr. AV.Raghu Ram, leamed counsel for the
petitioner and Ms. Sapna Reddy, leamed counsel represenringMr. J.V.Prasad, leamed Standing Cor.rsel, Income Tax Departmentfor the respondents.
2. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of theC-onstitution of India prayng for the following reliefs:
(f the acdon of the 1" respondent in adjusting the rcfund ofRs.6,14,54,400.00 due to the petitioner for assessmenryear 2021-22 against the alleged demands outstanding forassessment yeas 2014-15 and 2017-18 as being illegal, arbitraryand against the provisions of the Act, CBDT Circular and theirown order granting stay and set aside the same and consequently,direct the respondents to fonhwfth tsue refund ofRs.6,14,54,400.00 to the petitioner along with interest; and
(if the action of the 1" respondent withholding refund ofRs.12,41,04,410.00 due to the petitioner for assessmentyar 2020-21 for being adjuted against the taxes allegedly duefor assessment )ears 2014-15 and 2018-19 as being illegal,art itrary and against the provisions of the Act, CBDT Circular
and their o'rm order gl"nting stay and consequemly ii:ect the 1"respondent to fonhwith refund the allount ofRs.12.41,04 410.C0 to the petitioner along widr interesr and passsuch other rrder (s) as the Hon'ble Coun deems fir and properin the inten st of justice.
3. kamed counsel for the petitioner strbrnits on instructiors
that petitioner sants to withdraw the writ peririon rvith leave toapproach the :espondents for rectification of eror in the interestcalculation.
4. In view of above, \(/rit Petition is dismissed c,l u,ithdrawalwith libenyas rrayed for. No costs.
As a se,1uel, miscellaneous peririons, pending if any, stand
closed.SHAMsD,-P.c-! GISRFFICER/ITRUE [COPY'I]st:oTlo
To,rcF' [rcr]12. 3H33[ 3. 3H33[ 3H33[ Two [3li f""ff'XtsUiSHi.:SEtT"f'l' ]
1ti2. 3H33[ 3. 3H33[ 3H33[ Two [CD CoP ][as]KARBSBst6-
\
HIGH COURTDATE -t:0910112023
*1l-tE,(i')16 FEB 2M\.-o.\,'/'irr\.i-i:
WP.No.39 49'6 of 2022
DISMISSING THE WFII PETITIONAS IVITl{DRAWNWITI.]OU'T COSTS
't [c-dE]t1.l,r.
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.