TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 629
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the case the Ld. Assessing officer has erred in law in denying refund of Rs. 4,70,222/- to DTC Employees Superannuation Pension Trust for the Assessment year 1999-2000. The Assessing Officer has totally ignored the facts that the assessee did file their return with original TDS certificate and has been claiming for refund for assessment year 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 since 2002. 2. Because the assessee submitted Indemnity bond for all three years on 05.11.2002 and again on 20.03.2005 separately for all the three years and therefore, was entitled to refund for the year 1999-2000 for which revised return was admittedly filed with the original certificate. 3. Because there was no dispute on the issue that revised ret....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TDS certificate had been filed by the assessee. Before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, the Counsel of the assessee claimed that a letter with revised return for assessment year 1999-2000 had already been filed by the assessee on the instructions of the Department along with necessary documents. On the directions of the Court, the assessee filed all the necessary papers once again and based on this the Deputy Commissioner of Income tax (Exemption), Circle-1 (1), New Delhi passed an order rejecting the refund stating that the return was time barred. The order rejecting the claim of the assessee was placed before the Court and the Court granted liberty to the assessee to approach the appellate authority. 4. When the matter travelled to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as been placed on record. The reason given in the said communication is that, in the income tax return filed by the Petitioner for AY 1999- 00, it had not claimed any TDS. 2. Mrs Ahlawat states that the above reason is factually incorrect since according to her the Petitioner filed a revised return for AY 1999-2000, in which the TDS was claimed, and also furnished an indemnity bond on 20th March 2006, as required by the Department. 3. It may be open to the Petitioner to place the above details before the DCIT(E) within one week from today. Thereafter, after giving a hearing to the Petitioner by the DCIT(E), the DCIT(E) will decide the Petitioner's claim for refund of AY 1999-2000 within a period of four weeks. The orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the appellant that the revised return was filed within time since this finding of the Assessing Officer has not been challenged in the appellate proceedings. 5.7 In view of the facts as brought out by the Assessing Officer in her order I find no infirmity in the order passed by the Assessing Officer." 5. Against this order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. We have heard both the sides and perused the record. We find that initially, in this case, the matter of TDS refund has travelled to the Hon'ble High Court and the Hon'ble High Court directed the Revenue authorities to take appropriate decision. In this case, TDS was not claimed in the original return. Subsequently, TDS was claimed by a revised return. The relevan....