9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 335X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ises in the following factual background. The petitioner is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act and regularly assessed to tax. For the Assessment Year 2006-07, the petitioner filed its return of income on 21st January 2007 declaring nil income. The Assessing Officer framed scrutiny assessment on 19th December 2008 raising a tax demand of Rs. 44,49,365/=. Immediately upon receipt of such assessment order, the petitioner wrote a letter dated 1st January 2009 [inwarded into the office of the Income Tax on 9th January 2009] and stated as under: "We are in receipt of assessment order u/s. 143 (3) dated 19.12.2008 for A.Y 2006-07 together with demand notice according to which an amount of Rs. 44,78,867/= i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the demand for A.Y 2008-09 and the balance of the refund may please be issued to the assessee at your earliest. In the meantime, it is further requested that no coercive action for recovery of the demand may kindly be taken against the assessee when the excess tax collected to the tune of Rs. 2,28,14,850/= for A.Y 2008-09 is refundable to the assessee." It is undisputed that the respondents did not act on the petitioner's request for adjustment of the refund for about five months. Ultimately, however, under an intimation dated 21st May 2009 under Section 143(1) of the Act for A.Y 2008-09, the Income Tax Officer while accepting the claim of the petitioner of refund of Rs. 2,42,98,887/=, adjusted the petitioner's tax liability ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtificates, etc. This was done while processing the petitioner's return for AY 2008-09. Interest was therefore rightly charged. Having thus heard learned counsel and having perused the documents on record, we are of the opinion that the respondents have correctly raised interest demand for the period in question. It is, of course, true that soon after receipt of the assessment order for A.Y 2006-07, the petitioner communicated to the respondents that his refund for A.Y 2008-09, which is in excess of Rs. 2 Crores, be adjusted towards the tax demand for AY 2006-07. However, on such date, neither the computation of the refund payable to the petitioner under the return filed for the AY 2008-09 nor its right to seek such refund had been crystall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
