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

2024 (3) TMI 150

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nditions stipulated in the previous Circular dated 12.10.1993 both in respect of the upper limit so far as claim of refund amount is concerned and also as regards the aspect whether it was in the form of a supplementary additional claim or not. In view of the fact that the Circular dated 30.10.2003 was already in force when the impugned order was passed, we find it difficult to accept the contention of respondent No.1. The claim of the petitioner for refund of TDS was for an amount of Rs. 1,89,283/- which is much less than Rs. 5,00,000/- upper limit that has been reflected in the Circular dated 30.10.2003. Therefore, we find no reason as to why the respondent authorities should not have considered the aforesaid Circular dated 30.10.2003 whi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... x return on 31.07.2001 for the assessment year 2001-02 declaring a business loss of Rs. 5,00,000/- on estimate basis. The said return was processed under Section 143 of the Act by respondent No.3. The petitioner had subsequently filed revised return on 10.06.2003 declaring loss of Rs. 7,99,934/-. Along with the return, the petitioner had also claimed for refund of tax deducted at source on rental income on the basis of Form 16A. As respondent No.2 had not accepted the revised return, petitioner had filed an application seeking for condonation of delay in filing the revised return. It is this rejection of revised return and the rejection of the claim of the petitioner for refund of tax deducted at source, which led to filing of the present w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ling the return as laid down in the Instructions issued by the CBDT in F.No.225/208/93-IT(A-II), dt:12.10.1993. In view of the above, the delay in filing the revised return beyond statutory time limit and after the original return had been processed is not condoned . 5. A plain reading of the aforesaid operative part of the order passed by respondent No.1 would clearly reflect that the decision taken by respondent No.1 was based on the Circular dated 12.10.1993. The said circular dated 12.10.1993 empowered the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over a case to entertain a refund claim and dispose of the same on merits subject to the claimant satisfying certain conditions enumerated therein. The conditions so enumerated in the said Circula .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... amount of refund does not exceed Rs. 5,00,000/- for any one assessment year; (ii) the income of the assessee is not assessable in the hands of any other person under any of the provisions of the Act; (iii) no interest will be admissible on the belated refund claims; (iv) if the refund arises from the return of income filed for the first time, then the CCIT will be empowered to direct the Assessing Officer to make a regular assessment under section 143(3) and then issue the refund, if any; 8. A plain reading of the aforesaid conditions would clearly indicate that the authorities concerned had at the first instance relaxed the conditions so far as the supplementary claim as was reflected in the previous circular dated 12.10.1993. In addition .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d and also as regards the aspect whether it was in the form of a supplementary additional claim or not. 12. In view of the fact that the Circular dated 30.10.2003 was already in force when the impugned order was passed, we find it difficult to accept the contention of respondent No.1. The claim of the petitioner for refund of TDS was for an amount of Rs. 1,89,283/- which is much less than Rs. 5,00,000/- upper limit that has been reflected in the Circular dated 30.10.2003. Therefore, we find no reason as to why the respondent authorities should not have considered the aforesaid Circular dated 30.10.2003 while deciding the claim of the petitioner, when his claim was for refund of tax deducted at source. Nonetheless, there is no dispute that t .....

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