SKYLAND BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 22(2), NEW DELHI & ORS.
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court directed the concerned authorities to process the petitioner's claim for refund along with interest in accordance with law. The Court emphasized that the processing should be done expeditiously and in any event within a period of six weeks from the date of the order. The Court also referred to its previous decision in Ms. Anjul v. Office of Principal Commission of Income-tax: [2022] 145 taxmann.com 140 (Del.) as a guiding principle for processing the refund. The petition was disposed of in terms of this direction. No specific issue was left undecided; the court granted the primary relief sought by the petitioner.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Skyland Builders Private Limited, filed its return of income for AY 1999-2000, which was assessed at a higher amount by the Assessing Officer. Appeals to the CIT(A) and ITAT were partly allowed and then dismissed, respectively. The petitioner appealed to the Delhi High Court under Section 260A, which was admitted and later disposed of by a judgment dated 03.11.2020. Subsequently, the petitioner made a declaration under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020. A certificate dated 26.11.2021 was issued by the Designated Authority settling the dispute. The petitioner claims to have paid the dues and is entitled to a refund of INR 5,72,220, plus interest, which has not been processed despite reminders. The present writ petition seeks a mandamus directing the respondents to grant this refund.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of INR 5,72,220 along with applicable interest, as determined under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020? (Question of law and fact, concerning the implementation of the DTVSV Act, 2020 and the refund mechanism). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contends that following the settlement of the dispute under the DTVSV Act, 2020, and the issuance of a certificate by the Designated Authority, they are entitled to a refund of INR 5,72,220 plus interest, which has not been processed despite their efforts. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, accepted notice, indicating their appearance and potential response to the petition. No specific arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the Revenue in this order.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 05.05.2025
Issue notice.
Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue accepts notice.
The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under: “a. issue appropriate writ/order in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to grant refund of INR 5,72,220 as determined by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -7, New Delhi (“the Designated Authority”) vide Form – 5 dated 26.11.2021 acknowledgement number: 900386901261121 under DTVSV Act, 2020 along with the applicable interest till the date of grant of refund and;”
The petitioner had filed its return of income for Assessment Year [AY] 1999-2000 on 29.12.1999 declaring a total income of ₹21,97,770/-. Subsequently, on 11.04.2000, the petitioner filed its revised return declaring a 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 01/07/2025 at 22:16:52
total income of ₹11,55,450/-. The Assessing Officer [AO] examined the said return and issued an assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [Act] assessing the petitioner’s income for relevant assessment year at ₹79,92,900/-. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] which was partly allowed by an order dated 27.12.2002. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [ITAT] impugning the order dated 27.12.2002 passed by the learned CIT(A) to the extent that its appeal had been rejected.
The learned ITAT dismissed the petitioner’s appeal by an order dated 18.08.2004. The petitioner appealed the said decision before this court by filing an appeal under Section 260A of the Act [being ITA No.106/2005]. The said appeal was admitted by an order dated 15.04.2005. This court disposed of the said appeal by a judgment dated 03.11.2020. Thereafter, the petitioner made a declaration under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 as enacted by the Finance No.3 Act, 2020. The dispute in regard to the assessment years stood fully settled by the Designated Authority by issuing a certificate dated 26.11.2021 in Form-5. The petitioner had already deposited the tax and other dues part of which now required to be refunded. It is the petitioner’s grievance that the said refund has not been processed despite numerous reminders. In the aforesaid context, the petitioner has filed the present petition seeking a direction to the respondents to process its refund.
In view of the above, we consider it apposite to direct the concerned authorities to process the petitioner’s claim for refund along with interest in accordance with law and bearing in mind the decision of this Court in Ms. Anjul v. Office of Principal Commission of Income-tax: [2022] 145 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 01/07/2025 at 22:16:52
taxmann.com 140 (Del.) as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of six weeks from date.
The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J MAY 5, 2025 ‘gsr’ Click here to check corrigendum, if any 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 01/07/2025 at 22:16:52
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Shree Hanumant Steel Traders vs. Assistant CommissionerChhattisgarh · 1 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
