IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.24408 OF 2019(T-IT) BETWEEN:
Avo Carbon Holdings LLC 2711, Centerville Road, Suite 400, Wilmington, Delaware-19808 United States of America.
Represented by its Authorised representative, Mr.M.S.Manoj Aged 46 years, R/o No.99, 3rd West Street, Sri. Mehta Nagar, Andaankuppam, Kundratur, Chennai-600 069.
(By Sri.Nandakumar C.K, Advocate) AND :
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC 1ST Floor, Prestige Alpha No.48/1, 48/2, Beratena Agrahara, Begur Hobli, Hosur Road, Bengaluru-560 100.
(By Sri. Jeevan J.Neeralgi, Advocate) ... Petitioner … Respondent This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents to refund a sum of `1,33,30,196/- (Rupees One Crore Thirty Three Lakhs Thirty Thousand One Hundred and Ninety Six Only) along with interest issued by way of an order dated 27.06.2017 passed by the respondent for the assessment years 2015-2016.
This Writ Petition is coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in not refunding the amount of Rs.1,33,30,196/-(Rupees One Crore Thirty Three Lakhs Thirty Thousand One Hundred and Ninety Six Only) along with interest issued by way of an order No.CPC/1516/U6/1707001462 dated 27.06.2017, relating to the assessment year 2015-2016.
2. The petitioner – Company was incorporated and registered under Company Law of United States of America in the state of Delaware, Wilmington. It transpires the petitioner company has entered into a service agreement with AVO India and the petitioner has been filing income tax returns reporting the fees received from AVO India. AVO India deducted taxes [TDS] under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 ['Act' for short] before remitting service charges to the company. It appears, relating to the assessment year 2015-16, the assessment concluded under Section 143 [1] of the Act resulted in refund of Rs.1.2 Crores.
3. It transpires that the petitioner company opened a virtual bank account with Kotak Mahindra Bank and Indian Financial System Code and the details of which were furnished to the respondent for refund purposes.
4. It appears that the respondent had sought for a documentary proof of the bank account by way of a cancelled cheque leaf for the purpose of crediting the TDS amount which facility was not available under the virtual account. The representations made by the petitioner claiming the refund of the tax amount has remained unconsidered. Hence, this writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the status in the portal shows that the refund is processed but withheld. For procedural infractions, the petitioner company is facing harassment to avail the refund of TDS.
6. On instructions, learned counsel for the respondent – Revenue submits that alternative arrangements are made to remit the refund either through RTGS/NEFT or by issuing a Cheque/Demand Draft to the petitioner-company.
7. In view of the aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of directing the respondents to refund the amount of Rs.1,33,30,196/-(Rupees One Crore Thirty Three Lakhs Thirty Thousand One Hundred and Ninety Six Only) to the petitioner along with interest to which it is entitled to, in an expedite manner.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ag