9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 1414X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rn the said amount of ₹ 13,51,714/= which has been illegally withheld by the respondents for no reason. Therefore, the petitioner shall also be entitled to interest as per the Income-tax Act from 1st April 2013 i.e., after three months from the date of order of assessment for Assessment Year 2011- 2012. The present writ petition succeeds. The respondents are directed to return amount of ₹ 13,51,714/= with interest on and from 1st April 2013 till the actual amount is refunded/returned. The aforesaid amount with interest shall be returned to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today. Rule is made absolute to the aforestated extent with cost, which is quantified at ₹ 5,000/=; as for no reason, an amount of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 in State Bank of India, Vadodara, after recording statement of the petitioner. That thereafter, the petitioner-assessee filed return of income for Assessment Year 2011-2012 showing total income at ₹ 21,29,260/=. That the assessee did not show the said seized amount of ₹ 20,15,500/= in his income for the year under consideration. That thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice upon the petitioner-assessee under Section 143 [2] and 142 [1] of the Act calling upon the assessee to show cause as to why the seized amount of ₹ 20,15,500/= may not be added into the total income of the petitionerassessee for the year under consideration. That thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 143 [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring on behalf of the petitioner and Shri K.M Parikh, learned advocate for the respondent-Revenue. 4. It is vehemently submitted by Shri D.C Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitionerassessee that on and after the date of passing of the assessment order for A.Y 2011-2012 and after deducting the tax due and payable by the petitioner towards tax liability as per the original assessment order and more particularly when subsequently, addition of ₹ 20,15,500/= made by the Assessing Officer came to be set-aside by the learned CIT [A] and the Department refunded an amount of ₹ 6,48,286/= which was recovered/adjusted from the amount of ₹ 20,00,000/= [ ie. , seized amount], thereafter retaining the amount of &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 26th May 2014, while giving effect to the order passed by the learned CIT [A]. It is submitted that thereafter, the Revenue preferred Appeal before the learned Tribunal challenging the order passed by the learned CIT [A], however, the same came to be dismissed on the ground of low tax effect on 16th December 2015. It is submitted that therefore, the petitioner shall be entitled to interest from the date of order passed by the learned Tribunal, dismissing the appeal on the ground of low tax effect ie ., 16th December 2015. 5.1 It is further submitted by Shri Parikh, learned advocate for the Revenue that the amount seized from the possession of wife of the petitioner has been kept in a separate account, and therefore, it will take some ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... due and payable by the assessee to the Department towards any tax liability and/or any other liability. Under the circumstances, the balance amount of ₹ 13,51,714/= ought to have been returned to the petitioner. 8. At this stage, it is required to be noted that subsequently, the learned CIT [A] deleted the addition of ₹ 20,15,500/= under Order dated 8th April 2014 and the Department passed an order giving effect to the learned CIT [A] s order and issued a refund order of ₹ 6,72,550/= on 26th May 2014 ie ., the amount which was already recovered/adjusted from the seized amount of ₹ 20 Lakhs which was recovered as tax liability as per the Assessing Officer s which was recalled subsequently. 8.1 Under the circum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
