M. RAJAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/13874/2017HC KeralaKLHC01061821201709 November 2017Bench: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ petition by directing the 1st respondent, the Income Tax Officer, to refund the balance amount of Rs. 1,13,586/- to the petitioner within one month of receiving a copy of the judgment. This decision was based on the acknowledgement by the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent that the 3rd respondent had since uploaded the necessary TDS particulars. The court found that the initial objection raised by the revenue was no longer valid, and therefore, the petitioner was entitled to the refund. The ratio decidendi is that once the procedural defect leading to the withholding of a refund is rectified, the refund should be processed promptly.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M. Rajan, operating as Alankar Textiles, filed a writ petition seeking a refund of Rs. 1,13,586/- for Assessment Year 2008-09. This amount represented the remaining balance of Rs. 3,04,468/- deposited by the 3rd respondent, M/s. Atlantic Fabrics, as Tax Deducted at Source (TDS). The Income Tax Officer (1st respondent) had initially objected to the refund, citing that the 3rd respondent had not uploaded the deduction particulars on the web portal. However, the 3rd respondent subsequently filed a counter affidavit stating that the necessary details have been uploaded, a fact acknowledged by the Income Tax Officer's counsel.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund of Rs. 1,13,586/- for Assessment Year 2008-09, considering the initial objection by the Income Tax Officer regarding the non-uploading of TDS particulars by the deductor. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the amount of Rs. 1,13,586/- was the balance refund due out of a total TDS deposit of Rs. 3,04,468/- made by the 3rd respondent on their behalf. They sought a direction for the refund. Revenue's Contention: The 1st respondent (Income Tax Officer) initially objected to the refund on the grounds that the 3rd respondent (deductor) had not uploaded the particulars of the deductions made in the web portal. However, this objection was later withdrawn.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/18TH KARTHIKA, 1939 WP(C).No. 13874 of 2017 (H) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M. RAJAN,

ALANKAR TEXTILES, CHALAD, KANNUR -670 014.

BY ADV. SRI.S.ARUN RAJ. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KANNUR- 670 006.

2.

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MANACHIRA, CALICUT- 673 001.

3.

M/S.ATLANTIC FABRICS, 1658 & 1659, AMARAVATHY NAGAR, ANDANKOVIL POST, KARUR DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU- 639 002.

R1 & R2 BY SREELAL N. WARRIER, SC. R3 BY ADVS. SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN, SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN, SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN,

SRI.SABU GEORGE, SRI.S.NITHIN (ANCHAL).

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs.

WP(C).No. 13874 of 2017 (H) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF FORM NO.16A ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2008-09.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 04/10/2016 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC NO.14424/2016.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25/11/2016 ISSUED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15/12/2016 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21/02/2017 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15/03/2017 ISSUED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.R3A COPY OF THE REVISED TDS CERTIFICATE DATED 26/09/2017 BEARING NUMBER VCBTAVB. EXT.R3B COPY OF THE REVISED TDS CERTIFICATE DATED 26/09/2017 BEARING NUMBER VCBTSCB. EXT.R3C COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 05/10/2017 SENT BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.13874 OF 2017 (H) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of November, 2017 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to refund an amount of Rs.1,13,586/-, which was paid by way of tax, on behalf of the petitioner, for the assessment year 2008-09. In the writ petition, it is the contention of the petitioner that the aforesaid amount represents the balance amount remaining to be refunded to the petitioner out of the total of Rs.3,04,468/- that was deposited to the credit of the petitioner by the 3rd respondent by way of TDS. The 1st respondent raised objections to the grant of refund on the contention that the 3rd respondent had not uploaded the particulars of the deductions effected in the web portal. Through a counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, it is now stated that the necessary details have since been uploaded by the 3rd respondent, and this fact is acknowledged by the learned Standing counsel for the 1st respondent. Under such circumstances, I dispose the writ petition, directing the 1st respondent to take steps to refund

W.P.(C).No.13874/2017 2 the balance amount of Rs.1,13,586/- to the petitioner, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp/9/11/17

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →