Court Orders Prompt Refund of Tax Withheld: Petitioner's Claim Upheld

The court directed the respondents to refund the amount of Rs. 1,33,30,196 along with interest to the petitioner company in an expedited manner, resolving the issue of withheld tax refund for the assessment year 2015-2016. The petitioner's claim of procedural delays and harassment in obtaining the refund was acknowledged, leading to the court's decision to ensure prompt resolution of the matter.

---

---

Issues:
1. Refund of excess tax amount for assessment year 2015-2016 withheld by respondents.
2. Unavailability of cancelled cheque leaf for virtual bank account causing delay in refund process.
3. Alleged harassment faced by petitioner company in obtaining TDS refund.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a writ petition filed by a petitioner aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in not refunding the amount of Rs. 1,33,30,196 along with interest issued by way of an order dated 27.06.2017, relating to the assessment year 2015-2016. The petitioner, a company registered in the United States, had a service agreement with AVO India, which deducted taxes [TDS] before remitting service charges to the company. The assessment for the year 2015-16 resulted in a refund of Rs. 1.2 crores to the petitioner. The petitioner provided details of a virtual bank account with Kotak Mahindra Bank for the refund, but the respondent requested a cancelled cheque leaf which was not available for virtual accounts, leading to the delay in processing the refund.

The petitioner claimed that despite showing the refund as processed, it was being withheld due to procedural issues, causing harassment to the company. The respondent, through their counsel, informed the court that alternative arrangements were made to remit the refund through RTGS/NEFT or by issuing a Cheque/Demand Draft to the petitioner-company. The court, considering the submissions, disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to refund the amount of Rs. 1,33,30,196 to the petitioner along with the entitled interest in an expedited manner. The judgment emphasized the need for prompt resolution of the refund issue faced by the petitioner company, thereby bringing the legal proceedings to a close.

---