COBB APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4-2, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/6234/2025HC DelhiDLHC01028705202516 October 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition based on the submissions made by both parties. The court noted that the principal amount of the refund had already been paid to the petitioner. The Revenue, through its Senior Standing Counsel, undertook to process the payment of interest on the principal refund amount within a period of four weeks from the date of the order. The court explicitly directed that while processing the refund of interest, the Assessing Officer shall provide a detailed breakup of the interest calculation to the petitioner. No specific issue was left undecided; the matter was resolved by the undertaking given by the Revenue.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Cobb Apparels Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking a mandamus to direct the respondent, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4-2, Delhi, to issue a refund of Rs. 5,62,69,171/- along with interest of Rs. 46,42,206/-, totaling Rs. 6,09,11,377/-, for assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner argued that the respondent's inaction was unjust and arbitrary. The court was informed that the principal amount of the refund had already been disbursed. The sole remaining grievance of the petitioner was the non-payment of interest on the principal refund amount.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to receive interest on the refund amount for assessment year 2017-18, as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the respondent's inaction in refunding the principal amount and interest was unjust, arbitrary, and contrary to the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary issue raised was the non-payment of interest on the principal refund. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its counsel, stated that the principal amount had already been refunded. Further, on instructions, the Revenue assured the court that the interest on the principal amount would also be processed within four weeks from the date of the order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

None explicitly mentioned in the provided text, but the context implies provisions related to refunds and interest under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6234/2025 COBB APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr Sanat Kapoor, Advocate. versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4-2, DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vipul Agarwal, SSC, Ms. Sakshi Shairwal, JSC, Mr. Akshat Singh, JSC, Mr. G. Ranjan, Ms. Harshita Kotru, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR O R D E R % 16.10.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition, inter alia, with the following prayer:- “A. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to issue refund of principal amount of Rs.5,62,69,171/- along with up-to-date interest amounting to Rs.46,42,206/- totaling to Rs.6,09,11,377/- in the case of the petitioner for assessment year 2017-18 as the inaction of the respondents is unjust, arbitrary and against the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961;” 2. In effect, the claim of the petitioner is for the refund of certain amount lying with the respondent/Revenue. 3. We have been informed that the principal amount has already been refunded. The only plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the 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 25/10/2025 at 12:49:00

interest thereon has not been paid. 4. Mr Vipul Aggarwal, Sr Standing Counsel for the Revenue, on instructions, states that even the interest on the principal amount shall be processed within a period of four weeks from today, as an outer limit. 5. Taking the said submission of the learned counsel for the respondent on record, this petition is disposed of. 6. It is also made clear that while paying the refund, the Assessing Officer shall also give the breakup of the calculation of the interest to the petitioner. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J VINOD KUMAR, J OCTOBER 16, 2025 M 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 25/10/2025 at 12:49:00

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →