Case Law Details
Zenon analytics Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Anr (Delhi High Court)
The case of Zenon Analytics Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India & Anr before the Delhi High Court revolves around the rejection of refund applications for specific tax periods solely on the grounds of limitation. The petitioner contested this decision, citing a crucial notification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC).
The crux of the matter lies in the notification dated 05.07.2022, which excludes a particular period for the computation of the limitation period concerning refund applications. Despite the petitioner’s reliance on this notification, the respondent argued that their counter affidavit was filed before the notification was published.
However, the Delhi High Court found merit in the petitioner’s argument, stating that their case falls within the ambit of the CBIC notification. Consequently, the rejection of the refund claim based solely on limitation was deemed unsustainable by the court.
In its verdict, the court set aside the impugned orders dated 11.01.2022 and restored the refund applications for the respective tax periods. The Assessing Authority was directed to adjudicate on these applications within a stipulated timeframe.
The judgment in the Zenon Analytics case highlights the significance of regulatory notifications in tax-related matters. The decision underscores the principle of fairness in administrative proceedings, ensuring that taxpayers are not unduly disadvantaged due to procedural limitations. By setting aside the refund rejection and restoring the applications, the Delhi High Court reaffirmed the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and upholding the rights of taxpayers.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. Petitioner impugns two orders both dated 11.01.2022, whereby the applications of the petitioner seeking refund for the period May, 2019 to July, 2019 and August, 2019 to September, 2019 have been rejected solely on the ground of limitation.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner relies on notification dated 05.07.2022, issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs whereby the period between 01.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 has been excluded for the purposes of computation of period of limitation for filing an application for refund.
3. Learned counsel for respondent submits that counter affidavit in the present case was filed on 28.06.2022 i.e. before the subject Notification was published.
4. Clearly, the case of the petitioner is covered by the notification dated 05.07.2022, which excludes the aforesaid period for computation of period of limitation. Accordingly, rejection of the claim for refund of the petitioner solely on the ground of limitation is not sustainable.
5. Impugned orders both dated 11.01.2022 for the respective tax period are set aside. Refund applications are restored on the record of the Assessing Authority, who is directed to decide the applications in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from today.
6. Petition is allowed in the above terms. It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor commented upon the merits of the contentions of either party. All rights and contentions of parties are reserved.
Author Bio
