STATE BANK OF PATIALA vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/6459/2017HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01104042201725 April 2017Bench: MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA,MRS JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed that the difference between the refund for Assessment Year 2011-12 and the amount payable for Assessment Year 2014-15 shall be refunded to the petitioner on or before May 5, 2017, in accordance with law. The Court noted that the revenue did not dispute the refund being payable after adjustment. The parties submitted that the writ petition had been rendered infructuous in view of this direction and requested it to be disposed of accordingly. The Court ordered accordingly. No specific issue was left undecided, as the core dispute regarding the immediate refund was resolved by the court's direction.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, State Bank of Patiala, sought a refund of approximately ₹105 Crores for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. The revenue had an appeal effect order for AY 2014-15 creating a liability of about ₹85.88 Crores. For AY 2015-16, a liability of approximately ₹371 Crores was created, but the petitioner claimed to have already deposited 15% of this disputed liability at the time of filing its appeal. The petitioner prayed for the refund of AY 2011-12 to be released after adjusting the liability for AY 2014-15. The revenue filed a reply and acknowledged that the refund for AY 2011-12, after adjustment for AY 2014-15, was payable as of that date. The matter regarding payment exceeding 15% for AY 2015-16 was referred to the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of approximately ₹105 Crores for AY 2011-12, after adjusting the liability of approximately ₹85.88 Crores for AY 2014-15. (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning refund entitlement and adjustment of liabilities). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that it was entitled to the refund of ₹105 Crores for AY 2011-12. It further contended that the liability for AY 2014-15 was approximately ₹85.88 Crores. For AY 2015-16, while a liability of ₹371 Crores was created, the petitioner had already complied with the requirement of depositing 15% of the disputed liability. Therefore, the petitioner prayed for the refund of AY 2011-12 to be released after adjusting the tax payable for AY 2014-15. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue filed a reply and did not dispute that the refund for AY 2011-12, after adjusting the liability for AY 2014-15, was payable as on the date of the hearing. The revenue also submitted that the issue regarding payment exceeding 15% in terms of Board Circular dated 29.02.2016 had been referred to the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 6459 of 2017 Decided on : 25.04.2017 State Bank of Patiala . . . Petitioner Versus The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala and others . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN PRESENT: Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. B.M. Monga, Advocate and Mr. Amit Parshad, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Z.S. Klar, Advocate for the respondents. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia claimed that the petitioner is entitled to refund of `105 Crores (approximately) for the Assessment Year 2011-12. It was submitted that liability on the basis of appeal effect order passed for the Assessment Year 2014-15 is about `85.88 Crores. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that for the Assessment Year 2015-16 though a liability of `371 Crores (approximately) has been created, but at the time of filing of the appeal, the requirement of 15% of deposit of disputed liability has already been made. In such circumstances, it was prayed that the petitioner be allowed the refund out of the amount relating to the Assessment Year 2011-12, after adjusting the tax payable for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents-revenue has filed reply to Jawala Ram 2017.04.28 13:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 6459 of 2017 - 2 - the replication dated 05.04.2017 of the petitioner, in Court today. The same is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. A copy thereof has been handed over to the counsel opposite. 4. Mr. Klar, learned counsel for the revenue has further submitted that the matter for payment of amount exceeding 15% in terms of Board Circular, dated 29.02.2016 (Annexure P-1) has already been referred to the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala. However, learned counsel for the revenue did not dispute that the refund for the Assessment Year 2011-12 after adjusting the liability for the Assessment Year 2014-15 is payable by the revenue as on date. 5. In view of the above, it is directed that the difference between, the refund for Assessment Year 2011-12 and the amount payable for the Assessment Year 2014-15, shall be refunded to the petitioner on or before 05th May, 2017, in accordance with law. 6. Accordingly, learned counsel for the parties submitted that the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous and may be disposed of as such. 7. Ordered accordingly. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (RAMENDRA JAIN) April 25, 2017 JUDGE J.Ram

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Jawala Ram 2017.04.28 13:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →