THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4(3)(1) vs. M/S KAYPEE ELECTRONICS AND ASSOCIATES PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers
WA/960/2026HC KarnatakaKAHC01020952202613 August 2026Author: S.G.PANDIT,K.MANMADHA RAO4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the writ appeal filed by the revenue. The Court noted that the learned Single Judge had allowed the respondent assessee's writ petition for refund and interest, following the precedent set in M/s.Biesse India Pvt. Ltd. The Court further observed that the revenue had previously filed a similar writ appeal (Writ Appeal No.1619/2024) against the order in the Biesse India Pvt. Ltd case. This Court, by its order dated 05.08.2025, had rejected that appeal, confirming the Single Judge's decision that the assessment pursuant to the ITAT's direction ought to have been completed on or before 31.03.2022. As the facts in the present appeal were identical, the Court found no grounds to interfere with the learned Single Judge's order and accordingly rejected the present appeal.

What were the facts?

The appeal by the Deputy Commissioners of Income Tax (appellants/revenue) challenges the order dated 24.04.2025 of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.1307/2025. The respondent assessee, M/s Kaypee Electronics and Associates Pvt Ltd, had sought a writ of mandamus to grant a refund of tax paid under protest, along with interest under Section 244(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2010-11. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had previously remanded the assessee's appeal by an order dated 17.01.2020. The assessing authority was required to pass an order under Section 153 of the Act on or before 31.03.2022. As no order was passed by the Assessing Officer (AO), the assessee sought a refund.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned Single Judge erred in allowing the writ petition of the respondent assessee seeking a refund of tax paid under protest along with interest under Section 244(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for assessment year 2010-11, following the decision in M/s.Biesse India Pvt. Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax? Assessee's Contention: The assessee sought a writ of mandamus for refund of tax paid under protest with interest, as the AO failed to pass an order within the stipulated time after the ITAT's remand order. Revenue's Contention: The revenue appealed against the Single Judge's order, which had allowed the assessee's claim for refund and interest. The revenue argued that the Single Judge's decision was incorrect. However, the judgment does not explicitly detail the revenue's specific arguments beyond their appeal against the Single Judge's order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 244(A),Section 153

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO. 960 OF 2026 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

1.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4(3)(1) 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGALA BANGALORE - 560 095.

2.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TRANSFER PRICING CIRCLE 2(1)(1), 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGALA BANGALORE - 560 095. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, SR. STANDING COUNSEL A/W SRI M. DILIP, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S KAYPEE ELECTRONICS AND ASSOCIATES PVT LTD 3038 304, SOMAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA 1ST STAGE, NIDAVANDA VILLAGE SOMPURA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT (REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER

Digitally signed by G SHREERAKSHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

COMPANIES ACT 1956 MR. SHRI N.V.RAMANA MURTHY S/O SHRI KOTILINGAM NAIDU AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS) …RESPONDENT

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24/04/2025 IN WP NO.1307/2025(T-IT) PASSED BY THE HON’BLE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND ETC.,

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

Heard learned counsel Sri.E.I.Sanmathi and Sri.Dileep for the appellant.

2.

The above appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, questioning the correctness and legality of the Order dated 24.04.2025 in Writ Petition No.1307/2025 (T-IT), wherein respondent’s writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus to grant refund of tax paid under protest along with interest under Section 244(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short)

for the assessment year 2010-11 was allowed following the decision in M/s.Biesse India Pvt. Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax in Writ Petition No.16223/2023 dated 05.02.2024.

3.

In the instant case, the ITAT remanded the appeal of respondent by Order dated 17.01.2020. The assessing authority ought to have passed Order under Section 153 of the Act on or before 31.03.2022. As no order was passed by the AO, the respondent/assessee had sought for refund.

4.

Learned single Judge, following the decision in M/s.Biesse India Pvt. Ltd (supra), allowed the writ petition. It is brought to our notice that the case in M/s.Biesse India Pvt. Ltd was the subject matter of Writ Appeal No.1619/2024 filed by the appellant/revenue. This Court, by order dated 05.08.2025, rejected the Writ Appeal No.1619/2024 of the appellant/revenue and confirmed the order passed by the learned single Judge in

M/s.Biesse India Pvt. Ltd (supra) holding that assessment pursuant to the direction of the Tribunal ought to have been completed on or before 31.03.2022. The facts in the instant appeal are identical in nature. No ground is made out to interfere with the order passed by the learned single Judge.

5.

Following the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in Writ Appeal No.1619/2024 dated 05.08.2025, the present Appeal is also rejected.

Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE

BNV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

More judgments on Section 153

All 1,265 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →