AO Can’t Refuse to Refund Amount Merely Because Proceedings Were Pending Before DRP | HC

  • Blog|News|Income Tax|
  • 2 Min Read
  • By Taxmann
  • |
  • Last Updated on 19 January, 2024

Recent Posts

Blog, Income Tax

Section 115QA Buy-Back Tax Amendment – What Shareholders Need to Know

Blog, Advisory, Company Law

[Analysis] SEBI Regulations on Overseas Mutual Funds – New Guidelines for Global Investments

Latest from Taxmann

DRP proceedings

Case Details: IBM India (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax. - [2024] 158 taxmann.com 70 (Karnataka)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

    • B.M. Shyam Prasad, J.
    • T. Suryanarayana, Sr. Adv. & Ms Tanmayee Rajkumar, Adv. for the Petitioner.
    • E.I. Sanmathi, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The JCIT, in terms of the order of the Tribunal, had determined that a certain amount was refundable to the assessee for the relevant assessment year 2013-14. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) refused to give a refund of the amount, stating that the Tribunal, by an order, quashed the assessment order for the assessment year 2010-11 and restored the proceedings for reconsideration of certain issues.

The proceedings as regards the subject assessment year were pending before the DRP. In the interregnum (in the year 2023), the refund payable had been adjusted towards what could be a possible demand for the assessment year 2010-11.

Aggrieved-assessee filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that there was no recoverable demand from the assessee as of today, and the adjustment was in anticipation of the conclusion of a particular proceeding in a possible manner without due process. AO submitted that it could give due credit to the amount refundable in terms of the order of the JCIT when the AO will have to pass an order to give effect to the directions by the DRP.

AO could not point out any provision in the statute or otherwise to justify the retention in the peculiarities of the instant case. In the absence of the statutory provision or the enablement otherwise in law, the retention of the amount in anticipation of the conclusion of the DRP proceedings and giving credit to the amount while giving effect to the orders thereafter cannot be accepted.

There would be no justification for denying the assessee the advantage of the refund. It was too salient that a levy could not be unless it were with the authority of law. Therefore, there has to be a direction to the AO to ensure that steps were taken to affect the refund in terms of the order of the JCIT to the assessee.

Accordingly, the AO was directed to identify and take all steps to refund the assessee the amount consequent to the order of the JCIT.

List of Cases Referred to

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

«
»

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com

Author: Taxmann

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that's easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied