TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 95
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r ORDER PC. 1. At the request of the counsel appearing on both sides, the petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at the stage of admission. 2. This petition challenges the order dated 24.4.2012 passed by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax passed under Section 119 (2) (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dismissing the petitioner's application for admitting its three c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect of tax deducted at source in respect of A.Y.2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05. These TDS certificates were in respect of the payments made to the petitioners. The amount of TDS certificates issued for the Assessment year 2002-03 is Rs.21 lacs, for the Assessment year 2003-04 is Rs.35.83 lacs and for the Assessment year 2004-05 is Rs.28.61 lacs. 5. On receipt of the above TDS certificates in Novemb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rit by the Assessing Officer. The reasons for the delay in filing the claim for refund was the late receipt of TDS certificate from the said parties. 6. Thereafter by the impugned order dated 24.4.2012 the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax rejected all the three applications for condonation of delay in filing the refund claim for Assessment years 2002- 03 to 2004-05. The impugned order dated 24.4.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aim for refund. Therefore, the three applications dated 17.3.2009 filed on 26.3.2009 of the petitioner has been rejected by applying a non-existing circular and ignoring the circular/Instruction dated 22.12.2006. 8. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order dated 24.4.2012. However, we direct the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax to hear the petitioners and dispose of the petitioner....