9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 868X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Poddar, learned senior advocate for the petitioner, it does not appear that applications for refund are time barred. The original application for refund is dated 31st August 2007 followed by reminders. The assessment year was 2006-2007. A claim for refund had to be made before 31st March 2008. The application for refund dated 31st August 2007, it seems to me, was well within time. One would g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us direct the respondent authorities to treat the application as the application for refund and to process the same in accordance with law so that the refund amount along with accrued interest thereon is paid to the writ petitioner by 31st December 2014. - WP No. 37 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 14-8-2014 - I P Mukerji, J For the Petitioner : Mr N K Poddar, Sr. Adv. Mr Ashok Gupta, Adv. Mr Vineet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partment has got no objection to refund the said amount along with interest to the writ petitioner. After all, the writ petitioner is also a statutory body, created by an Act of Parliament. But the dispute between the parties is with regard to procedure. According to Mr. Bandopadhay, learned advocate for the revenue refund cannot be made on the basis of the existing application for refund by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to me, was well within time. Now consider the registration of the writ petitioner under Section 12AA with retrospective effect. One would get a situation when at the point of time fringe benefit tax was paid by the writ petitioner, they were not liable to pay such tax or to file such return. Therefore, this amount of ₹ 22 crores and odd can be said to be money paid under a mistake by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
