9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 498X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs: "(a) that this Hon'ble Court be declare that the provisions of subsection (1D) of section 143 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is unconstitutional and hence, liable to be struck down; (b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that the impugned Instruction/Circular No.1 of 2015 dated 13.1.2015 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes is illegal, void and unsustainable in law and accordingly is liable to be set aside; (c) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records pertaining to the Petitioner case an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. 5. The petitioner claims that it is engaged in providing customer interaction, back office and related services. They are claimed to be in the nature of information technology/enabled services. The petitioner claims to be known as and operates by the name "Aegis Group of Companies". For the Assessment Year 2014-15, the petitioner filed its return of income electronically on 26-11-2014. It declared a total loss of Rs. 28,14,68,635/, including long term capital loss of Rs. 26,45,57,970/while claiming a refund amounting to Rs. 19,75,98,310/. This return was required to be processed, according to the petitioner, in terms of the second proviso to subsection (1) of Section 143 of the In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refunds, the respondents are denying them the same in the garb of Section 143(1D) and the CBDT Instruction. This selective approach also prejudices the petitioner. 10. It is in the above factual background and reply of respondent No.4, which proceeds on the footing that the return of income for the Assessment Year 2015-16 was filed electronically on 27-11-2015 declaring a certain loss while claiming a refund of taxes, a notice was issued. A representation for processing of the refund was filed and its pendency being not disputed, that we called upon both sides to take appropriate instructions. 11. Mr. Chopra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that if this Court were to direct the processing of the ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... larly on the larger challenge raised in the writ petition and they are kept open for being considered and decided in an appropriate case, we dispose of this petition in the following terms: 15. We direct that the refund application of the petitioner pending with the Department shall be processed by the Competent Authority, namely, respondent No.4, as expeditiously as possible and in accordance with law. 16. We grant two weeks' time for the same. The time to commence from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 17. We clarify that we have expressed no opinion on the merits of the refund application. This application shall be dealt with in accordance with law. 18. Once we direct disposal of the refund application, needless to cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
