NOKIA NETWORKS FRANCE EARLIER KNOWN AS ALCATEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INT TAX 2 2 2 DELHI AND ANOTHER

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/16601/2024HC DelhiDLHC01087619202402 December 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court directed the respondents to process the petitioner's claim for refund along with interest as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of the order. The Court noted the petitioner's submission that the refund of ₹3,72,94,076 was determined by the assessment order dated 28.10.2023 and that the respondents had failed to process it. In the event the respondents were of the view that the refund was not payable for any reason, they were directed to communicate the same to the petitioner within the stipulated period. The Court explicitly stated that all rights and contentions of the parties were reserved. The petition was accordingly disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Nokia Networks France (formerly Alcatel Lucent International), filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents (Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and another) to issue a determined refund of INR 3,72,94,076. This refund was determined by a final Assessment Order dated 28.10.2023. The petitioner contended that despite the refund being determined and no grounds existing for withholding it, the respondents had failed to process and issue the refund. The Revenue's counsel accepted notice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Respondents are liable to issue the determined refund of INR 3,72,94,076 along with applicable statutory interest under Section 244A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as prayed by the petitioner? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the refund of INR 3,72,94,076 was determined by the assessment order dated 28.10.2023 and that the respondents have failed to process and issue this refund despite no valid grounds for withholding it. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for the Revenue accepted notice, but no specific arguments or contentions were recorded on behalf of the Revenue regarding the refund or the grounds for withholding it.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 244A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~75 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 16601/2024 NOKIA NETWORKS FRANCE EARLIER KNOWN AS ALCATEL LUCENT INTERNATIONAL

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Mr. Nikhil Agarwal, Mr. Puru Medhira and Mr. Nishank Vashistha, Advocates

versus

ASSISSTANT COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE INT TAX 2 2 2 DELHI AND ANOTHER

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC with Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rishabh Nangia, JSCs with Mr. Nikhil Jain, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

O R D E R %

02.12.2024 1. Issue notice. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the Revenue accepts notice. 3. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under: “(a) Issue a Writ of mandamus, or a Writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ or Order directing the Respondents to issue the determined refund issued via final Assessment Order dated 28.10.2023 amounting to INR 3,72,94,076 along with applicable statutory interest under section 244A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 within a period of two weeks; 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 06/12/2024 at 12:53:29

(b) For such further and other reliefs, including costs of this Petition, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case.” 4. It is the petitioner’s case that the amount of refund of ₹3,72,94,076/- is determined as payable to the petitioner in terms of the assessment order dated 28.10.2023. It is also contended that even though there has been no ground for withholding the refund, the respondents have failed and neglected to process the refund. 5. In view of the above, we consider it apposite to direct the respondents to process the petitioner’s claim for refund along with interest, as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a period of four weeks from date. 6. In the event the respondents are of the view that the refund, as determined, is not payable for any reason, the respondents shall communicate the same to the petitioner within the aforesaid period. All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved. 7. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J DECEMBER 2, 2024 zp

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 06/12/2024 at 12:53:29

More judgments on Section 244A

All 1,186 judgments and leading authorities on Section 244A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →