The present three writ petition filed by the assessee against the order of the department seeking to attach the refund of Rs.29,01,56,762/-, Rs.51,30,88,859/- and Rs.25,62,58,769/- aggregating to Rs.105,95,04,390/- u/s 281B of the Act relating to A.Y. 2007-08, A.Y. 2008-09 and A.Y. 2009-10 respectively due to the petitioner-assessee. Against the writ petition being 679/2014 and 680/2014 of the assessee seeking direction that the respondent gave effect to the order of the Tribunal, the respondent/revenue on 24/12/2014 filed an affidavit and assured the Court that effect was being given to the order of the tribunal. However, proceedings for attachment had already been commenced and sanction on 12/12/2014 also obtained from the Commissioner to the attachment of refunds due to the petitioner, yet the same was not pointed out either to the petitioner or to the Court.
The Petitioner submitted that total refund which has to be adjusted for the A.Y. 2007-08 to 2009-10 amounts to Rs.105,95,04,390/- and they were undergoing grave liquidity problems and were therefore in need of the funds which were legitimately due to them. However to secure the revenue, initially the petitioner were willing to replace the security by making available immovable properties free from encumbrances for attachment by the Revenue but later submitted that they would secure the Revenue by a Bank Guarantee for 100% of the refund attached i.e. Rs.105,95,04,390/-.
The Ld. counsel of the revenue did not raised any objection of being secured by a Bank Guarantee.
Held by the Court
The Hon’ble Court held that the petitioner was justified in making a grievance with regard to the Respondents/Revenue’s failure to disclose all facts in its affidavit filed on 24/12/2014. The Respondents/Revenue was expected to be fair in its dealing with the Assessee and also to the Court.
In view of the petition filed by the assessee above, the court directed the respondent would vacate the attachment of the refund of Rs.105,95,04,390/- done u/s 281B of the act, as the petitioner was furnishing a Bank Guarantee of a Nationalised Bank for the equal amount and to the satisfaction of the CIT. It was further ordered that the BG furnished by the petitioner will be kept alive till the final disposal of the reassessment notices for the Assessment year 2008-2009 to 2011-2012 and for eight weeks thereafter. Once the Bank Guarantee in the above terms was furnished to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Panaji, the Respondents/Revenue would hand over the three refund amounts aggregating to Rs. 105,95,04,390/- to the petitioner within one week thereafter.