MIXPANEL INC vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX 2 2 1 NEW DELHI & ANR.
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petitions. The Court noted that the Assessing Officer had passed orders determining the refund and applicable interest. The Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents assured that the payment would be made within four weeks. Consequently, the Court directed the Assessing Officer to pay the requisite amount along with applicable interest under Section 244A and Section 244A(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in accordance with the law, on or before November 30, 2026. The Court did not leave any issue undecided, as the matter was resolved by the assurance of payment and the subsequent directions.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Mixpanel, Inc., filed three writ petitions (W.P.(C) 7165/2026, 7166/2026, and 7168/2026) before the Delhi High Court. The petitions were filed against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2-2-1, International Tax, New Delhi, and another respondent. During the pendency of these writ petitions, the Assessing Officer (AO) passed orders and determined the refund and applicable interest. The Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents assured the Court that the requisite amount would be paid or credited to the petitioner's account within four weeks.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Assessing Officer has passed the necessary orders determining the refund and applicable interest for the petitioner, Mixpanel, Inc. (mixed question of fact and law). 2. Whether the respondents are liable to pay the determined refund and applicable interest to the petitioner within a stipulated timeframe (mixed question of fact and law). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner informed the Court that the AO had passed orders determining the refund and applicable interest during the pendency of the writ petitions. The petitioner sought directions for the payment of these amounts. Revenue's Contention: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents assured the Court that the requisite amount shall be paid/credited in the petitioner’s account within four weeks. No specific authorities or precedents were mentioned in the judgment for either side.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
$~4, 5 & 7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010232092026 + W.P.(C) 7165/2026 # CNR No. DLHC010232102026 + W.P.(C) 7166/2026 # CNR No. DLHC010232122026 + W.P.(C) 7168/2026
MIXPANEL, INC.
.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney & Mr. Nishank Vashistha, Advs.
versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2-2-1, INTERNATIONAL TAX, NEW DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh, JSC, Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSC & Mr. Shamindra Kumar Dev, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE ADITI CHOUDHARY
O R D E R %
07.10.2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner informed that during the pendency of the present writ petitions, the Assessing Officer (AO) has passed orders and determined the refund and applicable interest. 2. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents assures that the requisite amount shall be paid/credited in the petitioner’s account within four weeks. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/10/2026 at 11:34:47
We, therefore, dispose of the writ petitions while directing the AO to pay the requisite amount alongwith applicable interest under Section 244A and Section 244A(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in accordance with law, on or before 30.11.2026. 4. Writ petitions stand disposed of alongwith interlocutory applications.
DINESH MEHTA, J.
ADITI CHOUDHARY, J. OCTOBER 7, 2026/sid
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/10/2026 at 11:34:47
More judgments on Section 244A
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), RajkotITA 366/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(5), RajkotITA 257/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 3453/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6805/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Pratibha Sanjai Srivastava, Ahmedabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(1), AhmedabadITA 2565/AHD/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2021-2022
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Md. Akhtar Ansari, Proprietor Of M/S Indian Associates vs. State Of Jharkhand, Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Commercial Tax Dept.Jharkhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Amarjothi Granites (INDIA) PVT. LTD., Berhampur, Ganjam vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026