Disposed¶21

Icici Bank Ltd. v. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3)(1)

Bombay HC8 May 2025WP/5128/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interest u/s 244A — computation till actual credit of refund vs date of refund order — departmental affidavit concession that order-date interpretation incorrect — undertaking to credit amount within eight weeks of upload of order — petition disposed of as withdrawn, no costs — ICIC Bank Ltd. v. Dy. CIT-2(3)(1) Mumbai — Bombay High Court — Writ Petition No. 5128 of 2024 — 08 May 2025.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw the writ petition granted on the strength of the Respondents' affidavit and counsel's statement; Respondents to calculate and pay interest under section 244A till actual credit of the refund in the assessee's bank account, to be credited within eight weeks from the date of uploading of the order; compliance directed; no order for costs. ¶21

Icici Bank Ltd. vs Dy Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3)(1) — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether interest under section 244A of the Act is payable only up to the date of the order granting refund, or up to the date of actual credit of the refund amount in the assessee's bank account.

¶13

Court's answer

The Court recorded that the Respondents have agreed to calculate interest under section 244A for the period till the actual credit of the refund amount in the assessee's bank account and to pay the same to the Petitioner-assessee.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

On the statement of Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Respondents, accepted by the Court, the interest amount is to be paid/credited into the assessee's bank account as early as possible and in any event within eight weeks from the date of uploading of the order.

¶18

Key takeaways

Accepting counsel's statements and the affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondents, the Court granted the Petitioner's request for leave to withdraw the Petition and disposed of it as withdrawn, recording the statements and directing compliance.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction (M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.) — Writ Petition No. 5128 of 2024, ICIC Bank Ltd. v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-2(3)(1) Mumbai & ors. (decided 08 May 2025). The grievance concerned interest under section 244A of the Act, which the respondents had calculated only till the date of the orders granting refund and not till the date of credit of the refund in the assessee's bank account. An affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Mr. Bhagirath Ramawat, admitted that computing interest to the date of the order was not a correct interpretation and that interest should run till actual credit of the refund. On instructions, Mr. Abhishek Mishra, counsel for the respondents, undertook that the amount would be paid/credited into the assessee's bank account as early as possible and in any event within eight weeks from upload of the order. Accepting these statements along with Ms. Arati Vissanji's request, the Court disposed of the petition as withdrawn with a direction to comply, and passed no order for costs. The Court itself laid down no substantive ruling on the computation of interest under section 244A; the disposal rests entirely on the departmental concession and undertaking. No precedent was cited or discussed.

¶1

(903) WP-5128.24.DOCX

¶2

Digitally signed by LAXMIKANT LAXMIKANT GOPAL CHANDAN GOPAL Date: CHANDAN 2025.05.08 18:00:13 +0530

¶3

lgc

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 5128 OF 2024

¶6

ICIC Bank Ltd. : Petitioner Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-2(3)(1) Mumbai & ors. : Respondents

¶7

Ms. Arati Vissanji , for the Petitioner. Mr Abhishek Mishra , for the Respondents.

¶8

CORAM M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ. DATED: 08 May 2025

¶9

PC:-

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

Mr. Bhagirath Ramawat, the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), has filed an Affidavit on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶12

Amongst other matters, this affidavit states as follows :-

¶13

“In the petitioner’s cases, the refunds were granted upto the date of orders and the interest U/s 244A have been calculated till the date of order and not till the date of credit of refund to assessee’s bank account. The taking the date of grant of refund (expression used in section 244A of the Act)

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

(903) WP-5128.24.DOCX

¶16

as the date of passing of the order does not appear to be a correct interpretation of the relevant provision. The interest should be calculated for the period till actual credit of the refund amount in assessee’s bank account.”

¶17

The above, means that the Respondents have agreed to calculate the interest for the period till the actual credit of the refund amount in the assessee’s bank account and pay the same to the Petitioner - assessee.

¶18

On instructions, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Respondents, states that this amount will be paid/credited into the assessee’s bank account as early as possible and in any event, within eight weeks from the date of uploading of this order.

¶19

As it is, this matter has been prolonged, both, to the prejudice of the Petitioner as well as the Respondents. The Respondents, on account of this delay, have now required to pay this interest. Accordingly, there is no point in further delaying such payment.

¶20

By accepting Mr. Mishra’s statement about the time-line and the statement in the affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondents, we accept Ms. Vissanji’s request for leave to withdraw this Petition.

¶21