TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... receipt of this order – Decided in favor of Assessee. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6726 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 9-7-2013 - MR. M.R. SHAH AND MS SONIA GOKANI, JJ. FOR THE PETITIONER : Mr. SP MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms. PAURAMI B SHETH, ADVOCATE JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI) 1. Rule. Learned advocate Ms. Paurami B. Sheth appears and waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent no.2. 2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is preferred for seeking refund of Rs. 2,11,415/=, with the following factual background. 3. The petitioner is an assessee who filed his return of income as required under section 139 of the Income tax Act, 1961 [ Act hereinafter] for the Assessment Year 2010-11. Such tax return was filed electronically declaring his total income at Rs. 8,61,077/= [rupees eighteen lacs sixty one thousand seventy seven]. As per the entire computation, the refund entitlement the petitioner claimed, was to the tune of Rs. 2,11,415/= on adjustment of Tax deducted at source { TDS for short}. It is averred that the respondent no.1 inadvertently missed out giving credit of the TDS of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matched as proper details like BSR Code, Date of Deposit, Challan sequence number, Exact amount paid in case of multiple payments, Details of each payments to be furnished has not been furnished by the assessee, however, during rectification, the same has not been corrected by the assessee. 5. Affidavit in rejoinder on behalf of the petitioner is preferred where he has denied all the contentions raised in the affidavit in reply. It is empathetically urged that all relevant details for claiming the TDS amount were submitted to the respondents authorities and all forms; including Form 16A were also annexed with the application and the respondents were aware that the TDS credit was required to be given and yet, for the reasons best known to them, the said mistake has not been corrected till the date. It is further urged that the jurisdictional Assessing Officer is the respondent no. 2, however, on account of non-transfer of the details by the CPC, Bangalore [the respondent no.1] to the respondent no.2, the assessee has not been given his due by way of refund. It is further urged that the system is online and all details of TDS are available on the net. The TDS has been deducted at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een made under section 139, or in response to a notice under subsection (1) of section 142, such return shall be processed in the following manner, namely : (a) the total income or loss shall be computed after making the following adjustments, namely : (i) any arithmetical error in the return; or (ii) an incorrect claim, if such incorrect claim is apparent from any information in the return; (b) the tax and interest, if any, shall be computed on the basis of the total income computed under clause (a); (c) the sum payable by, or the amount of refund due to, the assessee shall be determined after adjustment of the tax and interest, if any, computed under clause (b) by any tax deducted at source, any tax collected at source, any advance tax paid, any relief allowable under an agreement under section 90 or section 90A, or any relief allowable under section 91, any rebate allowable under Part A of Chapter VIII, any tax paid on self-assessment and any amount paid otherwise by way of tax or interest; (d) an intimation shall be prepared or generated and sent to the assessee specifying the sum determined to be payable by, or the amount of refund due to, the assessee under clau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpanies viz., Messrs. Indian Oil Corporation Limited; GAIL India Limited; Futura Travels Limited; Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, etc. It is apparent from the communication in the form of an Order dated 17th March 2011 issued by the respondent no. 1 that he has not been given credit of TDS of Rs. 3,78,608/= , as is visible from the computation made under section 143 (1) of the Act. Thus, it can be seen that on one hand, in the details available with the Department from Form 26AS, the amount of TDS is to the tune of Rs. 4,00,647=36p. and in the return filed by the petitioner, the claim made by him is to the tune of Rs. 3,78,608/=. However, while passing the final order, there is a complete absence of taking into account the said amount of TDS in the computation as has been accepted by the Department as well. The petitioner is unable to explain as to why he has claimed less amount though the total amount of TDS shown in the department record is Rs. 4,00,647=36p. and the TDS income claimed is Rs. 3,78,608/=. 13. Be that as it may, the respondents have not succeeded in bringing anything on the record to indicate any default on the part of the petitioner to furnish any of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to this Court for getting his legitimate due. This attitude for sure does not find favour with the Court, as more responsive and litigant centric system is expected; particularly in the era of computerization. Tax payers friendly regime is promised in this electronic age. For want of necessary coordination between the two departments, the assessee cannot be expected to be sent from pillar to the post. 14.1 Thus, from the discussion above, it can be very well said that the respondent no. 2 has failed to perform its duty as provided under section 154 of the Act. When a glaring mistake was pointed out to the authority, it ought to have amended the order of assessment by exercising powers under section 154 of the Act, which in the present case, the authority failed to exercise and consequently, the petitioner was compelled to approach this Court by way of the present petition. 15. We could not resist ourselves from taking note of details provided in the official website of Income tax Department which reveals the extension of computerization in the department so far and their vision for the same in this field. With a view to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Direct Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th tax base; and (h) to keep the cost of administration at an acceptable level over a period of time. 15.1 Thus, computerization of the Income Tax Department when has undergone the exercise of a comprehensive business process reengineering , it is expected that Department s wish to herald Tax payers friendly regime becomes the reality. A paradigm shift is programmed as tax payers population has been growing exponentially, ushering all the imperative changes and modernization of administration. 15.2 If the Centralized Processing Center meant for return processing, accounts, refund, storage of data etc. adds to the difficulties of the Tax payers, due to lack of distribution of work between back office and front office, and that too, after having been pointed out the actual error, a serious relook is expected. 16. Resultantly, this petition succeeds. Respondents are directed to take into account the total sum of TDS as is reflected in Form 26AS and after computing such TDS amount, issue refund in the name of the petitioner. As mentioned hereinabove, the sum claimed by the petitioner towards TDS is Rs. 3,78,608/=, however, in Form 26AS, the amount of TDS is Rs. 4,00,064=36 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
