TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1614X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erms of the return filed on 25.11.2010 wherein the petitioner had claimed refund on account of excess tax deposited/deducted towards its liability for the said year - petitioner was entitled to refund of ₹ 30,42,838/- in accordance with law - Petition allowed. - CWP No. 1272 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 2-5-2018 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, JJ. For The Petitioner : Mr. Narender Singh, Advocate and Mr. Malkiat Singh, Advocate And Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar, DAG, Haryana ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal,J. 1. Prayer in this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for a direction to respondent No.4 to issue refund due to the petitioner company alongwith statutory inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the assessment order dated 26.3.2013, Annexure P.2. The case was remanded back to the assessing authority for de novo assessment with a direction to allow the TDS after verification. The assessing authority was directed to decide the case within one month from the date of receipt of the order. However, respondent No.4 did not initiate the assessment proceedings de novo. The petitioner submitted all the relevant documents before the assessing authority. According to the petitioner, as per Section 18 of the HVAT Act, the limitation period for assessment in consequence of any order made by any court or authority is two years from the date of receipt of the copy of the order by the assessing authority. In the present case, the assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the order of assessment/reassessment could be passed by the assessing authority on remand within a period of two years of the receipt of copy of such order by the said authority. Learned counsel submitted that the appellate authority vide order dated 19.11.2013 had remanded the matter for denovo assessment to the assessing authority which was sent by registered post bearing No. 2791 dated 10.12.2013 as per Annexure P.7 appended along with the replication. Learned counsel further submitted that the assessment order passed on 29.12.2016 attached as Annexure R.1 with the written statement, was clearly beyond limitation and thus no refund could be withheld by the assessing authority. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of such order by the assessing authority; ( ii) xxxxxx In the present case, the initial assessment order dated 26.3.2013 had been set aside which was sent by registered post bearing No. 2791 dated 10.12.2013 as per Annexure P.7 appended alongwith replication. The assessment order in pursuance of remand order passed on 29.12.2016 as per Annexure R.1 attached with the written statement, was clearly barred by limitation as it had not been passed within the limitation period. Accordingly, the assessment of the petitioner company would be governed by Section 15(1) of the Act as a case of deemed assessment in terms of the return filed on 25.11.2010 wherein the petitioner had claimed refund on account of excess tax deposited/d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
