2018 (12) TMI 1222 - HC - Income Tax

Refund of the tax - Held that - So far the petitioner has not demanded refund by submitting any application. In response the petitioner s counsel submits that the Ext.P5 is a self-operating order. At any rate the learned Standing Counsel assures the Court that if the petitioner applies the Department will consider the petitioner s request expeditiously.

Summary

Issues:
1. Application for settlement under Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme 2016.
2. Refund application filed after remittance of tax.
3. Discrepancy in the amount payable for refund.
4. Petitioner's claim for refund based on Ext.P5 order.
5. Response of the Department regarding refund application.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner applied for a settlement under the Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme 2016 and remitted the tax as per the orders passed by the authorities. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted an application for refund of the tax based on Ext.P1 proceedings. The Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) passed the Ext.P5 order, rectifying the amount payable for refund, reducing it to Rs. 10,66,406 from Rs. 12,51,705 as initially stated.

2. The petitioner, seeking refund in accordance with the corrected amount mentioned in Ext.P5, filed a writ petition. The response from the Department's Standing Counsel highlighted that the petitioner had not formally demanded the refund by submitting an application. In contrast, the petitioner's counsel argued that Ext.P5 is a self-operating order, implying that a separate application for refund may not be necessary.

3. The Court, without delving into the merits of the case, disposed of the writ petition with the condition that if the petitioner applies for a refund as per the Ext.P5 order, the authorities should consider the application promptly. The learned Standing Counsel assured the Court that the Department would expedite the processing of the petitioner's refund request once formally submitted.

In conclusion, the judgment addresses the discrepancy in the amount payable for refund, emphasizing the need for the petitioner to formally apply for the refund based on the corrected amount specified in the Ext.P5 order. The Court's decision ensures that the Department will promptly consider the petitioner's refund application once submitted, providing clarity and a path forward for the resolution of the tax refund issue.