QUALCOMM INCORPORATED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 3 (1)(1), DELHI AND ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)-1666/2022HC Delhi2022:DHC:34428 January 20224 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petitions with specific directions to the Assessing Officer. For assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11, the Assessing Officer was directed to issue refunds along with up to date interest within six weeks. For assessment year 2011-12, the Assessing Officer was directed to pass a rectification order and issue any refund due, along with up to date interest, within ten weeks. For assessment year 2012-13, the Assessing Officer was directed to pass an appeal effect order and pay any refund due, along with up to date interest, within twelve weeks. The court's decision was based on the representations made by the revenue regarding the steps being taken to rectify the situation and process the refunds as per the ITAT orders and statutory timelines.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Qualcomm Incorporated, filed writ petitions before the Delhi High Court challenging the inaction of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax in processing their income tax returns and issuing refunds with interest for assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, and 2012-13. The petitioner contended that despite favorable orders from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and subsequent appeal effect orders dated August 8, 2018, they were being denied legitimate TDS credit and refunds without legal basis. The revenue, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, stated that rectification orders for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 had been passed. They also mentioned that the refund for 2012-13 was adjusted against a demand for 2008-09, which was decided by the ITAT, and that a rectification order for 2011-12 would be passed shortly.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to directions for processing of returns, issuance of correct computations, and refunds with up to date interest for assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, and 2012-13, despite favorable ITAT orders and appeal effect orders. Assessee's Contention: The Petitioner argued that the respondents were denying legitimate TDS credit and refunds without any legal basis, even after the completion of proceedings and favorable ITAT orders. They relied on Article 265 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court decision in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India, and the Delhi High Court decision in Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue stated that rectification orders for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 had been passed. They further informed the court that the refund for assessment year 2012-13 was adjusted against the demand for assessment year 2008-09, which had been decided by the ITAT, and that the Assessing Officer would pass the appeal effect order within the statutory time. They also indicated that a rectification order for assessment year 2011-12 would be passed shortly.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (4 matters)

W.P.(C) 1666/2022
W.P.(C) 1670/2022
W.P.(C) 1686/2022
W.P.(C) 1687/2022

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

W.P.(C) 1666/2022, 1670/2022, 1686/2022, 1687/2022

Page 1 of 4

$~S-62, 64, 75 & 76 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 1666/2022 & CM APPL.4800/2022

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED

..... Petitioner

Through: Ms.Ananya Kapoor, Advocate.

versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 3 (1)(1), DELHI AND ORS.... Respondents

Through: Mr.Puneet Rai, Advocate.

WITH

+ W.P.(C) 1670/2022 & CM APPL.4804/2022

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED

..... Petitioner

Through: Ms.Ananya Kapoor, Advocate

versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 3-1-1 & ORS.

..... Respondents

Through: Mr.Puneet Rai, Advocate.

WITH

+ W.P.(C) 1686/2022 & CM APPL.4840/2022

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED

..... Petitioner

Through: Ms.Ananya Kapoor, Advocate

versus

2022:DHC:344-DB

W.P.(C) 1666/2022, 1670/2022, 1686/2022, 1687/2022

Page 2 of 4

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 3(1)(1), DELHI AND ORS.... Respondents

Through: Mr.Puneet Rai, Advocate.

WITH

+ W.P.(C) 1687/2022 & CM APPL.4841/2022

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED

..... Petitioner

Through: Ms.Ananya Kapoor, Advocate

versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 3(1) (1), DELHI AND ORS.... Respondents

Through: Mr.Puneet Rai, Advocate.

Date of Decision: 28th January, 2022

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J (ORAL) 1. The petitions have been heard by way of video conferencing. 2. By way of the present petitions, Petitioner seeks directions to the Respondents to process the returns of income, issue correct computations and process as well as issue refunds along with up to date interest for assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13.

2022:DHC:344-DB

W.P.(C) 1666/2022, 1670/2022, 1686/2022, 1687/2022

Page 3 of 4

3.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that even after completion of the entire proceedings and despite specific, binding and favorable orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) for the years under consideration and appeal effect orders dated 8th August, 2018, the Petitioner is being denied legitimate TDS credit and refunds without any legal basis. In support of her contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon Article 265 of the Constitution, decision of the Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India, [1997] 5 SCC 536 and decision of this Court in Ericsson India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, W.P.(C) 10373/2019. 4. Issue notice. Mr.Puneet Rai, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents. He states that the Assessing Officer has passed rectification orders with regard to the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 yesterday. He further states that refund for the assessment year 2012-13 was adjusted against the demand for the assessment year 2008-09. He candidly states that matter for assessment year 2008-09 has been decided by the ITAT and the Assessing Officer shall pass the appeal effect order within the time granted by the statute. He lastly states that the rectification order for the assessment year 2011-12 shall be passed shortly. 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid, this Court disposes of the present writ petitions and pending applications with the following directions: i) The Assessing Officer is directed to issue refunds along with up to date interest for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 within six weeks. ii) The Assessing Officer is directed to pass a rectification order and issue refund, if any, with up to date interest for the assessment year 2011-12 within ten weeks. 2022:DHC:344-DB

W.P.(C) 1666/2022, 1670/2022, 1686/2022, 1687/2022

Page 4 of 4

iii) The Assessing Officer is directed to pass an appeal effect order as well as pay refund, if any, with up to date interest for the assessment year 2012-13 within twelve weeks.

MANMOHAN, J

NAVIN CHAWLA, J JANUARY 28, 2022 TS

2022:DHC:344-DB

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →