9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 1023 - HC - Income TaxWithholding of the refund u/s 241A - HELD THAT - Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and in view of the guidelines in Mapel Logistics 2019 (11) TMI 340 - DELHI HIGH COURT as well as, the directions contained in the said order dated 03.03.2020 rendered by the Coordinate Bench 2020 (3) TMI 1243 - DELHI HIGH COURT we allow the present petition and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh speaking order, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and further permitting them to place on record the additional affidavit dated 01.06.2020, filed before this Court, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from today.
Issues involved:
Petition for quashing proceedings seeking to withhold refunds for Assessment Year 2018-19 and invoking section 241A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Analysis: The petitioner, M/s FIS Payment Solutions & Services India Private Limited, filed a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus to quash the proceedings initiated by the First respondent to withhold refunds for the Assessment Year 2018-19 and the approval granted by the Second respondent to invoke section 241A of the Income Tax Act. This was the second round of litigation between the parties regarding the tax refund. In a previous case, the court directed the respondents to refund the amounts for both assessment years along with applicable interest within four weeks, unless they had valid justification for withholding the refund. On the same day, the Assessing Officer proposed to withhold the refund pending completion of scrutiny assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2018-19 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Subsequently, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3 approved the withholding of the refund for the Assessment Year 2018-19 under section 241A of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner argued that the impugned orders did not comply with the guidelines set by the court in a previous case and requested the matter to be remitted back to the Respondents for fresh consideration. After hearing both parties and considering the guidelines from the previous case and the directions in the earlier order, the court allowed the petition and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh speaking order. The petitioner was granted six weeks to file an additional affidavit before the Assessing Officer. The court disposed of the petition with no further directions and ordered the judgment to be provided to the counsel electronically and uploaded on the court's website. This judgment highlights the importance of following court guidelines and ensuring proper consideration of refund matters under the Income Tax Act. The court's decision to remit the case back for fresh consideration emphasizes the need for adherence to legal procedures and fairness in tax refund proceedings.
|
