2003 (11) TMI 54 - HC - Income Tax

Court dismisses tax refund petition, upholding strict time limits under Income-tax Act.

The court dismissed the petition seeking a tax refund, ruling that the time limits specified in section 239 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 must be strictly ... The petitioner sought a refund of the tax paid by him. The request of the petitioner was declined by the Director, CBDT, by an order dated June 6, 2003. A perusal of the aforesaid order reveals that the claim made by the petitioner being belated, did not satisfy the mandatory requirement of section 239 and as such could not be entertained - We have perused section 119 of the Act, it is not possible for us to accept that the statutory provision incorporated under section 239 of the Act, is not amenable to relaxation at the hands of the Board through instructions under section 119 – Hence the claim for refund made by the petitioner could not be entertained – Petition dismissed Issues:Refund of tax paid, interpretation of section 239 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, applicability of section 119 for relaxation of statutory provisions.Analysis:The petitioner sought a refund of the tax paid, which was declined by the Director, Central Board of Direct Taxes, citing the claim as belated and not meeting the requirements of section 239 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 239(2) of the Act specifies the time limits for making a claim for refund based on the assessment year. The court noted that the statutory provision of section 239 regarding the time limit for refund claims cannot be relaxed by the Board under section 119 of the Act. The petitioner's argument for relaxation based on Board instructions under section 119 was rejected by the court.The court emphasized that the specific time limits mentioned in section 239 must be adhered to for entertaining refund claims. Despite the petitioner's contention for relaxation under section 119, the court held that the statutory provision of section 239 cannot be overridden through Board instructions. Consequently, the court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it. However, the court clarified that the dismissal of the petition does not preclude the petitioner from seeking any other available remedy.In conclusion, the court's judgment centered on the strict adherence to the time limits prescribed in section 239 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for refund claims, reaffirming that such statutory provisions cannot be relaxed through Board instructions under section 119 of the Act. The court's decision highlights the importance of complying with the specified legal framework for refund claims, thereby upholding the integrity of the tax refund process.