Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (9) TMI 354

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fund is found to be due to any person, the Assessing Officer, Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commissioner (Appeals) or Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Prl. Commissioner or Commissioner, as the case may be, may, in lieu of payment of the refund, set off the amount to be refunded or any part of that amount, against the sum, if any, remaining payable under this Act by the person to whom the refund is due, after giving an intimation in writing to such person of the action proposed to be taken under this section. The authorities ought to have exercised their powers under the provisions of the section-245 of the Act either to refund the amount due or adjust the refund against the outstanding demands for the assessment years .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... source in respect of provisions for expenses . The petitioner filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) challenging the order dated 28.3.2011 holding the petitioner to be an assessee-in-default. On 23.6.2011 rectification orders came to be passed under Section 154 of the Act rectifying the above orders dated 28.3.2011 for the assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2009-10. On 26.9.2011 the Income-Tax Officer (TDS-LTU) issued a letter requiring the petitioner to make payment of ₹ 90,37,91,992/- towards the demand of the four assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10. The appeals filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 30.3.2012. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Meanwhile, demands were raised on the petitioner by the 3rd respondent in the assessment concluded under Section 143(3) of the Act for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14, which were outstanding to some extent. On 12.1.2018 the petitioner addressed a letter to the authority in control of TRACES seeking their assistance in obtaining the refund due to it or in the alternative adjusting the refund due towards outstanding demand raised under Section 143(3) of the Act for the subsequent years. 4. On 2.2.2018 the petitioner received an e-mail from the authority in control of TRACES directing it to approach the jurisdictional Assessing Officer i.e., 2nd respondent. On 9.2.2018 the petitioner addressed an e-mail in response to the above e- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s.1 and 2 to forthwith refund the amount due to the petitioner pursuant to the orders dated 22.12.2017 passed by Respondent No.2 or in the alternative direct the respondents to adjust the refund amount due to the petitioner against the outstanding demands for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14. 7. Per contra, Sri Aravind, learned counsel for the respondents sought to justify the impugned action of the respondents and dismiss the writ petitions. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is an undisputed fact that after prolonged litigation between the parties, the 2nd respondent passed orders dated 22.12.2017 as per Annexure-H1 to H4 giving effect to the order dated 22.9.2017 passed by the Tribunal, determining ref .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd respondent or adjusted the refund due to the petitioner against the outstanding demands for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2013-14. The same has not been done in the present case. 10. The provisions of Section 245 of the Act clearly depicts that where under any of the provisions of the Act, a refund is found to be due to any person, the Assessing Officer, Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commissioner (Appeals) or Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Prl. Commissioner or Commissioner, as the case may be, may, in lieu of payment of the refund, set off the amount to be refunded or any part of that amount, against the sum, if any, remaining payable under this Act by the person to whom the refund is due, after giving an int .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates