Bombay HC Imposes Interest on Income Tax Officer for Refund Delay
Nirmalkumar Mulchand Puruswani (WP No 11043 of 2024)
Facts:
1. The time limit for giving effect to the Tribunal’s order dated 31st July 2006 had long expired. Still, by not issuing the order giving effect, refunds of Rs.6,03,482/- and Rs.5,98,274/- are being denied to the Petitioner.
2. The learned counsel for the Petitioners pointed out that such refunds were due because of taxes paid under the assessment orders.
3.,He has also submitted that such inaction and delay violate Articles 300A and 265 of the Constitutions of India and that such delay is also arbitrary by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
4. The Respondents have filed affidavits before Apart from trying to blame the Petitioner for not pursuing the matter diligently, there is an acknowledgment that case papers are not traceable since more than 10 years have elapsed.
Hon Bombay HC held as below:
1. The departmental officials were expected to be diligent, and the matter was required to be diligently pursued. The ITAT remand order needed to be complied with within a reasonable period and, in any event, within the limitation period prescribed by the law.
2. If this is not done, then the officials responsible for not doing this will have to be held accountable. Based on some vague statements about restructuring or major upheaval, no attempt can be made to avoid fixing responsibility.
3. Accordingly, we direct the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune, to investigate these matters and file affidavits explaining the status of the investigation.
4. The refund amounts will carry interest at 6% p.a. and must be paid to the petitioners. After such payment, the interest component must be recovered from the Officers responsible for the delay. There is no point in burdening the State Exchequer and, consequently, the taxpayer for inaction, whether deliberate or otherwise, on the part of the department officials.
The copy of the order is as under:
