Smt Bojamma B B vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 7 June, 2010

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Bojamma B B vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 7 June, 2010

Bench: Anand Byrareddy

ccrmnssxoxxa ax mums mx, BANG-3-ELORE ,: 
o3..:L1.2aos GRANTING nrzrumn wxmomr  
2':-manor; mp. rm Assmssmﬁm YEAR$..,,._fl99'-9:--=00  "

ENCLOSED 1:»: A2»mr:x*::mE--A m'rc.,  

This writ Petitiezl   . 
preliminary haazing in "B". -Srroup 'this[V.v¢ia;;yV,_ tljge %

Court passed the fol3.¢wiizg_V§"»:_A

 

This petition 5.;  cof at
the stage of    it arises
under   ate in 5
deciaimfs... in the came cf
  ¢'.1ﬁ1'.l.s1'£!1lﬂ or

  , nnaaanma xvpoztod

4.4; ,;;,.%-gear; V7133'  serum; I.

   briefly stated asca:---

".f"£zze"" pétx::itionaar is an individual and an

 V' }§:.:m3::i';1'.'¢:Laj-{aaVV" af 1115 . Infc-sys Taclmalogias

 V-,_'--Li§L1.§.£iéﬁi(hereina£ter referred to as "Company"

 hxavity) . The patizticner was granted

stack opticrm tmdar the aazplayea stock caption

acheme framed by the Ccxnpanggr. The patitionezr:

5



 .1   R5. R5. .
l'§.y.3.999-so 2,23,650!- 29,179 2,52,a2o/-

having exercised his cgtiozz during 

assasamsnt year 1999--2066, the 

treated as a. pexrquisite  t'I1ev--~ f_Dé;:tz1ty   'V

Camzisaioznex: of Income-Tax  hisf<:S1:de.r"-uﬁ¥ia_:'*<: '

Section 201 passed  -.._;::r:ié"3.:V_  HfV:if}.e 'A

Company. The tax and 'i'nf:e:c;e5t.":ﬁ§éte£inined
thereof due fzmzn the..._. §?¢tni:a:;;é'.'w&s "1':§covexad. as
Tax Deducted at Sgvzxﬁfﬁ. 'kmployeaa

pursuant tqﬂ  ::v::<w:*i-ai«._ uf>e;{é€g;¢.~:£i' the Deputy

Con'a:ni3a:V_j';<>x1 §A: * 5.   . The amcmnt
damandecf   was accardingly
diach&g:ge;dL"é§zz§i'A'E'€>ﬁi- §fz$.16 had bezen imesued to
 said Cazrrpany. The
"ﬁ§;af.'ﬁ: j.;).aid the follsswing sums by way

  of tag; c?._e<i"r.';fi'§..tA:T:.o:2 as per the following table:-

"    TAX I:ﬂ'ERE$"I' TGTAL

 patitiztmer filed return at income for the

aaaeaament year 1999-00 on 21.6.1999. While

filing the return the parquisite value of

5



A8

atock options as aaseaaed by Depifty

C-tmmissioner of Income-Tax was not inclu;ié__-§:i§.j' 

The petitioner subaequently 

zreviaed return including the;pegiqrgisite~. val1ié__ '

of stock options as a3§.rwa3se:i'~--_§4.s3r 

Coumiaaioner tzf Incctna-'T.%2§_V{Ta:x  at
Source) on 11 . 2 .208é "~~£oIr  :«._V_&%§£-.gs3mé'ﬁAVv year:
1999-00. The amid ;;@e;1ér3.M;:».§<5:'J&§;:aa barred

by time as ;1*%st:j§;u1ate:;""':i:a; i$i:m.__...%;c:t. $2: the

mear1wh:i;¥1e,_  a_f<_:::esaid had appealed

against thé  D-a§uty Caumissianar

of Inrgssaug-T$x-»{fIf&:§ ﬁédﬁcted at Seurcei and the

  nfkpp-ai'iAa.te Au'-zthexity, Barxgalzsxte

ﬁe;;;1«;, ' gppm ITA.Na.s1a-am/nmxzoao by

Z  _i1:aA'44or&,ar.,L :'~"<§ated 28.6.2062, the Irncome-f£'a1-:

""§ .". --j§g>pg11$ta:' Authority allowed the appeal againat:

 1_';hef"»-c i:der af Deyuty Corrnatsaaaicaner of incarna-

  Dsducted at Source: stating' that there

"is nc taxable parquisite azising cm a¢¢<:~uz::t of

vesting of stock options. The petitionar,

tzhezefcme, became entitled ta refund of tax on



perquiaite wrongly cieducted by the Ccawany.

The Assistant Caxmzissiomar of Income-Tax+-T31)3

while giving' effect to the ands: 3

Tribunal by an o::&ez: under Section  H

asaassmant year 1999-00 '€¥'.I'.:1:'-'Z€GfWNG.'§?:IT'(§ES}:(€3" 

16:2) o2-ca dacea 23.1O.V20G§ '.11:{aa_A sfﬁizﬁdv 

tha tax paid by the  fo'---- ._i:1'2.na_ _: 
Govezrnment ahtmld bee" .$:rea:i:'é:c:i _:§f.ﬁ 'p_aymétit' '(Sf tax

«on behalf at the peﬁsinxi   'income the

deductiyiﬁfz   "cider was: challenged

by %::he =Vp+aﬁitj,_61iajL9'"-Kfﬁhile also filing an

applic:a.tioI;"  £:r;ndox:;a'I:2'.on of delay in

 izlmzafurﬁﬁi "" 'ééplicatimn dated 28.1.2003

§af¢§_z.?éV "ﬁV¢.!'r§ir,i.:s5siona3: of Inzzome-Tax. In the

'   mea§iw¥ii1_e,--:VL'§§:h;3 appeal filad Say the department

.._ ] -v44._§gain$tf .__ *th¢ order of the Tribunal was

giigamiﬁzsed by this Ccmrt by its cxzder dated

. : "'-'.Ai5_,_i2.20G6 uphcslciing the conalusions and

ifinﬂingu of the: Tribunal, which is repcrted in

the szase of ii 01' Iﬂiﬁ-ﬁt .133.
10818 Ilﬂﬂﬂbﬂﬁliﬁ 13%'? [393 I23

5



1l6'(ll.£.)J. T2113 Court held that if refund.

applications are pending, the Department {ti-Ea:

liabla to settle the claim at the 

The Department, hcawavezr, preferred  

appeal tn'; the Sugpteme Ccxurt  t:izt.:_" 

of thia Ccaurt; which :48? .<.';.:'.:;a#1-'it-tiatecri 

of this Court was canfixmeﬁttby 
4.1.2099

, which is"zgpertt§dtt%%s;§:tttgn'{rm 1:7 sc(aam:saramn or most:

ﬁetitianer filed an app1:.i.e::atAi9n' the tax before tha re31>O¢?~'~3.fmt3t"'"' '+~V'?3¥".""22.';3'.";Z00?. The Coazuiaai-aner :'V:.VV.ﬁ1t\'iF'»i'1'€*"-'~«:I.3"5"-'*1 x":'?;'5359'V3Vi "" order under Section i19":.2i':$)»--«._t%.§é.t§é 3.0.'?..2008 candoning the d-elay in £i.__3V.i:;g~ reviaeci return and directed thé .4.f'.jj»-fgﬁttassingt' Officer to: pxzacz-ass the return of VA in accordanca with law. The zeapondent:

reﬁund order giving effact ta the cards: bf the Cotmaiasioner at Income-Tax, Bangalore V, camputing the refuxxdable amount withcut interest thereon for the aaaaasment year 1999- E9 00 on 3.11.2008. It is thia, whieh is scmght to be challenged.

3. While elaborating on sequence cf eventa, the leatgzegi the gmtitiozmr would submit Vthaliztthé»._'i:t§§uQ?ii¢c;'*1.'.1 arder insofar: as it zeiatges 2'-ta; eff grant of interest on the 15:.' epfgaasvééd ta the express proviaVi'c#';aA "&--<;fa;>' 3, _(a} . The learned ccunaelt. WGI;l€§"».<i%&F1_"~t,a'tI£'$iif§.it$n to the langzzagt vat which reads as £o11cm:~"tt.t' V' % 'L .. t'~"W'ner"e--V.1:he. refund is out tzzf 'tax paid" under Seeticn 13.5920' r.;rg --s:d1.leatad at sourve under "'t.Se2;;t5.'cz;1"--.206C or paid by way af .adv'a,n.c:ef~"tax mt treated as paid A» ' undé:'i._At"Secti¢n 199, during the financial year Ltmzediately gsregceding the awseasmant yeaztzr, _ _ esizch intexmst shall he V "pt:-alculatsd at the rate of anew " fhalf per «tent fer every month mt:

part of a month coamrised in the period mean that 1*" day of April of the assassznent year to tha date can which the re ﬁund 3.3 grant ad:

Provided that mt; intezeat shall in payable if the amount _ , of remind is 198$ than ten pe.f:f"'-- ' cent of the tax as datez:m:E.ne¢I" under Sub-Sectiorztl} of Sec't;.:£.<:_:r_::;'~~.x 115 WI? or sub-::e<:ti'csn£.1) Céf"-Q Sectian 143 or] an _J;*ajgu.3.a';:' ' ' a.a$esament;" " ' 4 . The learned coﬁnﬁel éigbmit that the refund to Li.fha 153:1: of tax treated as Vpaid cf tha Act as is 'jieadiing at the pxovisiﬁans pefititioner is entitled ta inte:: eg_t._ the petiticner is not ¢tf:»':.w3;:ec1' Vp.:3:t>viBC> to the aforesaid u.:S'iAﬁ33ésa{' i'3'i"5'5Vn'v%'"'3ﬂh ~e£"é""1é:he amount of refund is not ie=.e s.._[~ ta:-: ciatermineci under Saatian 143(1-)__ 9!' <§}:i9;§Tx:eg'ula: asaesament. The counsel ""': ,"V4"-V_r_V?i'.":"e'.§.1.€f3. siurihit that the patitiozzexfa case would "k;~'?e--.. 'cIa'r§rere<i uncle: that portion <>f Section (ha) which reads as foll<>ws:----

"In any other cae, Burch interest shall be calcszzlated at the mate of one»-half pm: «sent for every month or part wf a c?

month vcompriaed in the pmziod oz:

periods from the date car, as the cases may be, dates at payment of the tax or pamlty to the date on which the refund is gzanted."

3.. In View of the fact proceedings resulting ta ré;}:uz;c:it .fja.i:,a.' far the reasons not .a:t:_fc:ri}:$i:ﬂt;a?xb}.¢rst1:T§.a' petitioner, the question V-Es..vf_V'»:'e:gclii'5--:§.§h': any period in <:<>£r@ut:in§_._"':%««th?;§: 1-iz%ii:..g=e_'.w:Pe"at; (21063 not arise in »Se:i;:t;:i.§vhp'2*§.4;iX(2) . Therefete, it is patiticnex would be entitled t'<:..4_ §.ntVé:e};:t" in tame of Sectien .2&_44A§»§.;rs§g1s as :t'ol1ows:-

' v..,""§Whé're~*, as as. result of an g "--.t'or'dé;;*: funds: Sub-Sacticmts) <'.'aI1,'2' Sg-dtiiszzn 115% or Section 115%' pt, Sectiuon 115% or Suh--

Svac;-tzizzsnﬁi-3) of Sezzttzion 143 or .. Sectian 144 cu: Section 14'? or ..5Sact:i.-an 154 or Section 155 or Secti-::-n 250 223:: Section 254 or Section 260 cu: Saction 262 or Secstion 253' cu: Secticm 264 or an order of the Settlmant Comiasianer under Sub"

Sccrtionﬂ) at Secticm 2451'), the amount: on which intemast was payable under m1b-set:'c:'.c:n (1) 3 6.5 that inA"xgfi'a§¢ ' of the Tribunal having ' finality having been attainsad insofar as the 10 has: ham: increased or ::eciuc:ed,_;""*' the intezrwfc"

shall be increased O3? 3::adu.c.e_é=~._ = "

azztaaxtciingly, and in a .-era.-*:eé w'_kf1-a1:;a"». '4 reﬁuced«3'th¢'-"

Assessing Officer shall. seive "on.-_ . the asaassea a ngaitice at 'c1ame::.r.ig.v .'f9nm'«"

as the caae may be, the interaat is in the specifying the eamass intexest,----* ..fgm:%.r:1 requiring Tt<:: such amaunt; and "n;'uc12._f3* ;n<;s_"£:-.:E,t;:e , of demand ashall _be_' vdeve,m;ed""~t:¢:4~~..'j3;w4 a notice unsiar ;'Sect;.'i.o:;'=.15V_6 "and the praviae_i:>rj;;z"V 33_1:"hi:' Adi:------~=' shall p:eat:.ti~3;ed " A _ amciunt of é_t«:2';z'e thia (':<:mrt as well as ;ﬂ£ha_h§§kfc§u;tgi££§ rafund ta the petitions:

' This legal position. has Q alsc§'---.4__VAa:t:.ckx1c>wledgad by the Assistant: "".5i,i'A~Qsgmiséivéizaz, Increase-'i'ax{TI3S) in his order fiat-?;'aci.:'..'iE3.10.2002. It is therefoxs the cane of . patitizmsr that the denial at said refund intereat is illegal and in the face of lsga}. position is ctmctarned. Thé"cauii$Vel would submit 1} '1. he held by this Court 'l'lI1I;n1:ajan': case the first and eeeem: xretumze along with the application _t_.«_»;;'v_"':..,:.,.,;;'1;§.~Ari:.::lV'4:':1§%i= the delay in filing the infructuous, not being aieperqeigxite '£135. The Department noti%:e§i't*the\§ eeié facts in the for cezeaideretion the jveendene the delay in filihc§';the ;'.z:e*.i;ieeé'i and termed the matte _::efund"' whereas the questiez:z'ﬂe'f_ exiém jurisdiction under Sectieu. efvthe Act did not arise. ernmme, the iiiii tted. factual matrix, it seae similar impugned orders are a.x:hii:.ra:_f-__;' witheut jurisdiction and founci ainde the respendente had the benefit at the"--meniea belonging to the petitienera up to iiiiiitheti dates of refund and in the light of ea. 'eatena ef decisions of the Apex Court, over payment of compoundeci interest on refund, it was di::e<:ted that the zrequeet gr interest at I2 13% per annum compmznded mcnthly was kag't'~«%:>;:'§j::ﬁ5 A' for considaxzaticm by the first 1:e5§.r:u:fg};ia:1iA:A.T.::'1:.oT' be decided within the time accordingly allewed the w:cj_._t :ésrV£s2_tf."i'*1:ic>r~3 %A :'<:l:'1jig afaresaid reported _

8. Since the ' sllzanda on a similar f§3_«c>tingf.. open the petitio12er's _V "5:n't'§4'e;s;ﬁv¢:'$§§._...,$ver refund' which ahali the mapmdent within an from the data at this order, tiVI1e=:_Vx»e.I:f:L't; is allowed. The i;p:9ngne;i'~;¢i;tSe 1; at; "A.*u3.q;:ure-"A" is quashed.

Sci/3 IUDE

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court