HUAWEI TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDIA COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 17.03.2025 + W.P.(C) 10867/2024 HUAWEI TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDIA COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Mr Nikhil Agarwal and Mr Puru Medhira, Advocates. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr Indruj Singh Rai, senior standing counsel with Mr Sanjeev Menon, Mr Gaurav Kumar and Mr Rahul Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the rectified intimation dated 07.07.2022 [the impugned intimation] passed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act]. The petitioner, essentially, impugns the action of the Revenue in adjusting the refund of ₹19,37,43,880/- payable to the petitioner for assessment year [AY] 2020-21 against the outstanding demands in respect of AY 2016-17, AY 2017-18 and AY 2018-19. The petitioner also claims that the amounts adjusted be refunded along with interest as applicable. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 10867/2024 Page 1 of 9 By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:25.03.2025 13:19:14 2. A plain reading of the impugned intimation indicates that the Revenue has adjusted a sum of ₹7,12,46,726/- against the demand outstanding in respect of AY 2017-18 and a sum of ₹3,13,20,749/- in respect of AY 2018- 19. It is the petitioner’s case that, there was an absolute stay of recovery of a demand for the said assessment years being AY 2017-18 and 2018-19; therefore, the refunds due to the petitioner in respect of AY 2020-21 could not be adjusted against the demands for the said assessment years. 3. The learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [ITAT] had stayed t