Court directs refund of TDS payment, sets aside order. Respondents must process claim within 3 months.

The Court set aside the impugned order dated 28.07.2020 and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for the refund of TDS paid within three months. The Court instructed the respondents to process the refund request in accordance with the law, noting that the delay in submitting the returns had already been condoned in favor of the petitioner.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Petitioner seeking writ of certiorari to quash impugned order dated 28.07.2020.
2. Petitioner requesting writ of mandamus for refund of TDS amount with interest.
3. Petitioner asking for writ of mandamus to direct respondents to pay costs.
4. Petitioner seeking additional reliefs as deemed fit by the Court.
5. Respondent's contention regarding processing of petitioner's returns.
6. Analysis of the impugned order and reasons for rejection of delay condonation.
7. Court's decision on setting aside the impugned order and granting reliefs.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner filed a petition seeking various reliefs, including a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 28.07.2020. The petitioner also requested a writ of mandamus for the refund of TDS amount with interest and costs, along with other reliefs deemed fit by the Court.

2. The material on record revealed that the petitioner had submitted income tax returns, followed by a request for condonation of delay under Section 119 (2) (b) of the Income Tax Act, citing reasons for the delay. Despite the returns being processed and intimated to the petitioner, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the delay condonation application. The petitioner challenged this decision before the Court.

3. The respondent contended that the petitioner's returns had already been processed by the time the impugned order was passed. However, the Court observed that the rejection of the delay condonation application was erroneous, as the returns had been processed earlier, and there was no valid reason provided for the rejection.

4. The Court found the impugned order to be unreasoned, non-speaking, and lacking in application of mind. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order dated 28.07.2020 and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for the refund of TDS paid within three months. The Court also instructed the respondents to process the refund request in accordance with the law, considering that the delay in submitting the returns had already been condoned in favor of the petitioner.

---