TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 1650
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (C) Issue as far as the Petitioner is concerned an appropriate writ or order in the nature of Mandamus or otherwise, directing the Respondent to grant interest on refund of Rs. 80,45,656/- as situated under Section 244A(1A) for the AY 2012-13; (D) Grant such other reliefs as this Honourable High Court may think fit including the costs of this writ petition. AND (E) Quash as far as the petitioner is concerned by an appropriate writ or order in the nature of Certiorari or otherwise, the order giving effect to the order of the Tribunal passed under Section 254 r.w.s. 143(3) dated: 23.08.2023 passed by the Respondent vide DIN No. ITBA/GEA/M/254/2023-24/1055377988 for the AY 2012-13, enclosed as Annexure-P." 2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. The petitioner is a private limited company engaged in manufacturing and trading of wood working machine, components and related services. On 30.11.2012, the petitioner filed its returns declaring its total income as 'nil' for the assessment year 2012-13, pursuant to which, the respondent passed a final assessment ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2012-13 and contended that since the respondent had not passed orders giving effect to (OGE), the petitioner was being put to irreparable injury and hardship and had approached this Court by way of the present petition. 4. During the pendency of the present petition, the respondent passed an OGE dated 23.08.2023, pursuant to which, the petitioner got the petition amended and assailed the aforesaid OGE dated 23.08.2023 as Annexure-P to the writ petition, interalia contending that the same was non est and barred by limitation apart from being illegal and invalid under Section 153(5) of the I.T. Act as can be seen from the amended memorandum of writ petition. 5. The petition has been opposed by the respondent who contends that there is no merit in the same and is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 7. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that it is the specific contention of the petitioner that at the time of preferring the petition, since the respondent had not passed the OGE, in view of expiry of the period of three months from the end of the month, in which, the order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....od of limitation but that it imposes a fetter upon the power of the Assessing Officer to take action under the said provisions as held in the following cases; ● CCE & Customs v. Hongo India (P) Ltd., - (2009) 5 SCC 791; ● S.S. Gadgil v. Lal & Co., - [1964] 53 ITR 231 (SC) ● National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. v. Union of India - [2003] 260 ITR 548/128 Taxman 361 (SC); ● Oracle India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2015] 63 taxmann.com 24/235 Taxman 227 (Delhi); SLP dismissed in [2016] 241 Taxman 311 (SC); ● Sir Dinshaw Mulla in Nagendranath De v. Sureshchandra De - [ILR (1933) 60 Cal 1 : AIR 1932 PC 165] Referred in R. Rudraiah v. State of Karnataka, (1998) 3 SCC 23; ● CIT v. V.V. Devassy - [2018] 403 ITR 25 (Kerala). 13. It is also significant to note that once the period of limitation lapses, the concerned authority becomes functus officio and would not have jurisdiction to exercise the statutory power as held in the following cases; ● BalasinorNagrik Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Babubhai Shankerlal Pandya - (1987) 1 SCC 606 at page 609; ●....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es to be quashed and necessary directions are to be issued to the respondent to grant refund of Rs.4,73,27,390/- as stated in the refund application at Annexure-A dated 01.12.2022 filed by the petitioner. 18. Insofar as the claim of the petitioner for interest on refund under Section 244A(1)(b) of the I.T. Act is concerned, it is necessary to state that interest not paid along with the principal refunded would constitute 'any amount' under section 244A(1) and hence, interest on such interest not paid along with the principal amount refunded would also be liable to be paid to the assessee as held in the following decisions: ● CIT vs. H.E.G Ltd., - [2010] 324 ITR 331 (SC); ● CIT vs. Narendra Doshi - [2002] 254 ITR 606 (SC); ● CIT vs .Syndicate Bank - [2020] 428 ITR 372 (Kar); ● India Trade Promotion Organisation vs. CIT - [2014] 361 ITR 646 (Delhi); 19. Further, interest has to be granted under section 244A(1)(b) from the date of payment of tax up to the date on which refund is granted i.e., up to the credit of amount to the account of the assessee as hereunder:- ● Instruction No. 2 of 2007; 	....