MEDI ASSIST INSURANCE TPA PRIVATE LTD vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

WRIT PETITION No.3325 OF 2021(T-IT)

BETWEEN:

MEDI ASSIST INSURANCE TPA PRIVATE LTD ’SHILPA VIDYA’, 3RD FLOOR, NO.49, 1ST MAIN ROAD, SARAKKI INDUSTRIAL LAYOUT, III STAGE, J P NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 078 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI SATISH VENKATA NAGA GIDUGU AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O SRI SATYANARAYANA GIDUGU …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VANI.H., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) CIRCLE -2(1), NO.59, 4TH FLOOR, HMT BHAVAN, BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE - 560 032.

2 . CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY, O T DIVISION, 4TH FLOOR, JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI - 110 001.

3 . UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE REPRESENTED BY DIRECTORATE OF INCOME TAX (TDS) 5TH FLOOR, MAYUR BHAWAN CONNAUGHT CIRCUS NEW DELHI - 110 001.

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-TDS

H.M.T. BHAVAN

BELLARY ROAD

BENGALURU – 560 032.

IMPLEADED AS PERMITTED BY THE

HON’BLE COURT VIDE ORDER DT: 25.02.2021

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP., ADVOCATE FOR R-1, R-2 & R-4 SRI. MADANAN PILLAI.R., CGSC, FOR R-3)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO DECLARE THAT PETITIONER IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST U/S 201(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 SINCE R-1 HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THIS HONBLE COURT REGARDING THE COMPUTATION OF INTEREST AND ETC.

THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: a. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ in the nature of mandamus directing the first respondent to declare that Petitioner is not liable to pay interest under Section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 since first Respondent has not been able to comply with the directions of this Hon’ble Court regarding the computation of interest. b. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to accept the declarations filed by Petitioner in Form-I on 29.12.2020 under Section 4 of the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2008-09 vide ANNEXURES-K, K1, K2, K3, K4 AND K5 considering the dispute as a pending resolution

3 before the first Respondent and process the same on merits under the said Amnesty Scheme. c. Issue a writ of mandamus or a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the first Respondent to refund the excess amounts lying with the respondents along with interest immediately consequent upon the orders of the appellate authorities as affirmed by this Hon’ble Court in respect of the years under consideration, and d. Issue any other writ or a direction as deemed necessary on the facts of the present case to meet the ends of justice and equity.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1, 2, and 4 and learned counsel for respondent No.3 and perused the material on record.

The material on record discloses that as can be seen from the documents produced as document Nos.1 to 6 along with the Memo dated 08.09.2022, pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 25.02.2021, respondent No.4 has processed the application in Form-1 filed by the petitioner under the Direct Tax Vivad Se

4 Vishwas Act, 2020 and has issued Form-5 on 14.12.2021 for each of the Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2007-08. Accordingly, prayer Nos.1 and 2 sought for in the petition do not survive for consideration. Along with the said Memo dated 08.09.2022, the petitioner also enclosed the order dated 07.07.2022 passed by the respondents for the Assessment years 2003-04 to 2008-09 to give effect to Form-9 and direct refund of the amounts payable to the petitioner as can be seen from document Nos.7 to 12 produced by the petitioner along with the Memo dated 08.09.2022. In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the documents produced by the petitioner along with the Memo dated 08.09.2022 referred to supra, it is clear that the petitioner is entitled to refund of the amounts mentioned in document Nos.7 to 12 produced along with Memo dated 08.09.2022 and accordingly, I deem it just and appropriate to direct the concerned respondents to refund/repay the amounts indicated in document Nos.7 to 12 produced along with the Memo dated 08.09.2022, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period

5 of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petitions stands disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE

Bmc

MEDI ASSIST INSURANCE TPA PRIVATE LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS)