SERVICENOW NEDERLAND BV vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/17397/2024HC DelhiDLHC01094550202417 December 2024Bench: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court directed the Revenue to process the petitioner's application for Equalization Levy within a period of four weeks in accordance with law. Regarding the claim for compensatory interest, the Court allowed the petitioner's counsel to reserve the right to claim it after the statement of Equalization Levy is processed and any amounts due are returned. The Court clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties concerning the petitioner's claim for compensatory interest are reserved. The petition was disposed of in these terms. The Court did not make a final determination on the compensatory interest claim, leaving it open for future adjudication.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, ServiceNow Nederland BV, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging the inaction of the revenue authorities. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to process their Statement of Equalization Levy for assessment year 2022-23, grant consequential refund of excess Equalization Levy, and award compensatory interest. The petitioner's application for Equalization Levy was pending before the concerned authority. The respondents, represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and others, accepted notice. The High Court was asked to issue directions regarding the processing of the levy and the refund.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the respondents to process the Statement of Equalization Levy filed by the petitioner for assessment year 2022-23 under Section 167 of the Finance Act, 2016? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 167 of the Finance Act, 2016). 2. Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the respondents to forthwith grant consequential refund of excess Equalization Levy due to the petitioner for assessment year 2022-23? (Question of law and fact). 3. Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the respondents to grant compensatory interest on the refund of excess Equalization Levy due to the petitioner for assessment year 2022-23? (Question of law and fact). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner sought directions for processing the levy, granting refunds, and awarding compensatory interest. They relied on the pendency of their application before the authority. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue accepted notice, indicating their appearance and participation in the proceedings. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue in the provided text.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 167 of the Finance Act, 2016

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~76 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 17397/2024

SERVICENOW NEDERLAND BV

.....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Aditya Vohra, Mr. Shashwat

Dhamija, Advocates.

versus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

& ORS.

.....Respondent

Through: Mr. Sunil Aggarwal, SSC with Mr.

Shivansh B. Pandya, JSC, Mr Viplav

Acharya, Ms. Priya Sarkar, Mr.

Utkarsh Tiwari, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

O R D E R %

17.12.2024 CM APPL. 74050/2024

1.

Allowed subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 17397/2024 1. Issue notice. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents accepts notice. 2. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under: “a. Writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the Respondents to process the 26 Statement of Equalization Levy filed by the Petitioner for assessment year 2022-23 under section 167 of the Finance Act, 2016; b. Writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the Respondents to forthwith grant consequential refund of excess Equalization Levy due to the Petitioner 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 24/12/2024 at 12:02:27

for assessment year 2022-23; c. Writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the Respondents to grant compensatory interest on the refund of excess Equalization Levy due to the Petitioner for assessment year 2022-23; and d. Pass such order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3.

Undisputedly, the petitioner’s application for Equalisation Levy is pending before the Concerned Authority. 4. In view of the above, we direct the Revenue to process the same within a period of four weeks in accordance with law. 5. In so far as the petitioner’s claim for compensatory interest is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner reserves the right to claim the same after the statement of Equalisation Levy is processed and the amounts due to the petitioner, if any, are returned. 6. We dispose of the petition in the aforesaid terms. 7. We clarify that all rights and contentions of the parties regarding the petitioner’s claim for compensatory interest, are reserved.

VIBHU BAKHRU, ACJ

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J DECEMBER 17, 2024 KG

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 24/12/2024 at 12:02:27

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →