9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 808X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayment of the statutory interest from the time, this Court decided the appeal. much is insisted upon. Nima Specific Family Trust ( 2018 (10) TMI 441 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] had noted various provisions and also the decision of the Gujarat Flourochemicals Ltd. [ 2015 (2) TMI 453 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] to hold that there cannot be any direction for payment of interest on interest. The statute provided for interest on delayed refund under sub-section (1) of Section 244A, then newly inserted sub-section (1A) provides for additional interest. There cannot be any further directions for payment of interest over and above such statutory prescriptions and hence it had direction the cost of Rs.1 lac to the petitioner by way of compensation on the amount of interest which remained unpaid for long time. Respondent is not yet clear on the outstanding amount, however, it is volunteered that within three months, it shall be in a position to complete the same noticing the fact that the company has changed its name with all its past and future liabilities. As given e-pan number and it is the same pan number which was with M/s Bombardier Transportation, however, necessary procedure shall need to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year 2006-07 a sum of Rs.90,46,000/- against the demand raised by 11 different challans. It is also the say of the petitioner that the two challans were erroneously placed for assessment year 2006-07 and 2007- 08 being the sum of Rs.26,40,000/- and Rs.6,00,000/- respectively. In absence of any demand pending, this demand could not have been raised. 6. The appeal before ITAT against such dismissal order was preferred which allowed the assessee s appeal and deleted the penalty on 17.4.2009. 7. The tax appeal was preferred by the revenue being 1952 of 2009 which is heard and dismissed on 4.8.2016. 8. The department had not been issuing the refund. The petitioner had deposited sum of Rs.90,46,000/-. It is averred that the said amount deposited by the petitioner is due for refund. The communications on different dates are also reflected, however, no heed is paid. 9. The complaint was preferred before CPGRAM of CBDT on 19.6.2017 for not giving effect to the order of the ITAT and the High Court and for non-issuance of the refund. 10. The complaint came lodged for the assessment year 2013-14 as well. The CPGRAM provided the reply on 11.78.2017 and 2.8.2017, however, there is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding in case of the assessee company. The refund claimed and its adjustments is not possible to be processed on portal. The outstanding demand, according to the respondent, as per the TRACES portal is Rs.2,74,28,930/- and the other outstanding demand for other years has been Rs.70.83 crores (rounded off) as on 18.11.2019. The officers had been intimated through e-mail on 6.1.2023 and 11.1.2023 and however, no response has been made available so far. The demand, according to the respondent outstanding against the respective TAN/PAN and there are two separate portals for day-to-day functioning of the department ITBA (Income Tax Business Application) looks after the processing of Income Tax returns and TRACES takes care of processing of TDS returns/statements. TRACES portal and ITBA portal, being independent systems of the department having independent officers in charge and the officer having territorial jurisdiction over the same assessee. Hence, automatic inter departmental adjustment of refund of TDS proceedings and the department of refund TDS proceedings over outstanding demand of income tax proceedings and vice-a-versa has not been made functional till date. Therefore, the adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... instant case. Paragraph 4 makes it unequivocally clear that the respondent is still groping in dark with regard to the demand. Even if there had been a manual deposit and it is prior to the regime when everything went online, there is a sufficient time taken by the respondent authority of five years. With regard to the refund to be returned with the interest, sub-section (1A) inserted in Section 244A by the Finance Act of 1.6.2016 needs to be applied prospectively as per the decision of Nima Specific Family Trust (supra) for the period of delay after introduction of the relevant statutory provision and the assessee would be entitled to the compensation by way of interest. However, the assessee was held not to be entitled to the interest on interest which was awarded as compensation. In the instant case, the High Court has finalized the tax appeal on 4.8.2016. Considering the fact that both the provisions of Section 244 and 244A will be given effect to what the assessee is presently seeking is the compensation for the delay that has been caused in making the refund. It is not disputed that sub-section (1) of Section 244A requires the revenue to grant interest at the statutory ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
