2020 (1) TMI 694

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d as deposits and therefore they should be refunded back together with interest. Sub-clause (1) (a) to section 244 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 permits interest on delayed payment of refund. That being the case, the petitioner is justified in asking for interest on delayed refund of tax that was paid by his employer which has been held to be not payable by the employer. Further, once there is a refund and if there is a delay, interest is payable by the employer. There is no basis for denying interest on such delayed refund of the amounts. Petitioner has made out sufficient case for interfering with the impugned orders of this Court to give a positive direction to the respondents to pay interest to the petitioner on such delayed refun .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... und of tax paid by the petitioner s employer alone without interest. 7. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to interest under Section 244 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the petitioner once again approached the 2nd respondent with a request to revise the order of assessment by rectifying the same for the assessment year 1999-2000. 8. On 3.7.2013, the petitioner sent representation and requested for interest on delayed refund of amount. The petitioner enclosed copies of the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court, Karnataka High Court in the case of the petitioner s employer and that of this Court in W.P.No.2504 of 2010 dated 12.3.2010 wherein the interest was directed to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... before the appellate authorities and its now stands concluded that the petitioner s employer was not required to make Tax Deductions at Source on the shares allotted to the petitioner. Therefore, any amount paid by the employer during the pendency of such proceedings was liable to be refunded together with interest. 16. In this case, the amount paid by the petitioner s employer alone has been refunded back without interest vide 1st mentioned impugned order of the 1st respondent dated 5.10.2012. There is however no discussion as to why the interest under Section 244 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not payable to the petitioner. 17. The Honourable Supreme Court in Sandvik Asia Ltd versus Commissioner of Income .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X