TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 967X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s at that time the application for refund seeking to invoke under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act was time barred as it was filed beyond the period of six years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. This court on consideration of the facts, in the order dated 15th January, 2014 came to the conclusion that filing of the revised refund with the Respondent Revenue on 30th September, 2009 should be taken as a date/ application made under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. It was in the above view, Court directed the Respondent Revenue to grant refund of the amount claimed by the Petitioner. The refund which was granted to the Petitioner consequent to the order of this Court dated 15th January, 2014 was under the Act and not granted dehors the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay of more than six years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year i.e. A. Y. 2004-05. The Respondent Revenue was of the view that in view of Instruction No.13 of 2006 dated 22nd December, 2006 issued by the CBDT that an application for condonation of delay for refund made beyond a period of six years from the relevant Assessment Year could not be considered under Section 119 (2)(b) of the Act. This Court in its order dated 15th January, 2014 in W. P. No.2594 of 2013 inter alia held in paragraphs 6 and 7 as under:- 6: It is not disputed by the respondent revenue that on merits the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of refund of TDS as the payment received under the scheme is exempted under Section 10(10C) of the Act. The deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under Section 119 (2)(b) of the Act. Further, Respondent did not dispute the claim of the Petitioner for refund on merits but pleaded helplessness only on the ground of limitation as provided in the Instruction No.13 of 2006 dated 22nd December, 2006 issued by CBDT. It is further observed that on 8th May, 2009, the CBDT had issued circular wherein it had clarified that the employees of RBI who opted for early Retirement Scheme would be entitled to the benefit of Section 10(10C) of the Act. Consequently there was no occasion to pay tax as the amount received on retirement would not form part of total income. Thus, it was immediately after issuance of Circular dated 8th May, 2009 that on 30th September, 2009, the Petitioner filed its revise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lication for refund seeking to invoke under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act was time barred as it was filed beyond the period of six years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year. This court on consideration of the facts, in the order dated 15th January, 2014 came to the conclusion that filing of the revised refund with the Respondent Revenue on 30th September, 2009 should be taken as a date/ application made under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. It was in the above view, Court directed the Respondent Revenue to grant refund of the amount claimed by the Petitioner. The refund which was granted to the Petitioner consequent to the order of this Court dated 15th January, 2014 was under the Act and not granted dehors the Act as seems to have be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
