Disposed

Godaddy.Com Llc v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(3)(1)

Delhi HC22 May 2025W.P.(C)/7032/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order directs the Income Tax Authorities to pass appeal effect orders within eight weeks and process the refund of excess TDS and interest to Godaddy.com LLC following the ITAT's allowance of its appeals against scrutiny assessments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pass appeal effect orders and process refund with interest within eight weeks.

Godaddy.Com Llc Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… — GST and Indirect Tax | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~85

¶2

*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**

¶3

- W.P.(C) 7032/2025 & CM Appl No.31733/2025

¶4

GODADDY.COM LLC .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, Mr. Soumit Ganguli and Mr. Sarthak Tripathi, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(3)(1) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar, SSC with Ms. Monica Benjamin, Easha, Advs.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

¶8

O R D E R 22.05.2025

¶9

Issue notice.

¶10

Mr. Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondent, accepts notice.

¶11

The petitioner has filed the present petition praying as under:

¶12

“a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent/Ld. AO to pass the appeal effect Order and grant the consequential refund of excess TDS, aggregating Rs. 71,57,73,620/- for AY 201617 to AY 2019-20 and AY 2021-22, which includes statutory interest calculated up to 31.05.2025, together with all up to date statutory interest u/s 244A of the Act thereon until the actual date of payment, as the action of the Respondent/Ld. AO is

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 20:42:53

¶14

unjust, arbitrary and against the provisions of the Act.

¶15

b) Issue any other Writ, order or Direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶16

c) To allow the writ petition with cost in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondents”

¶17

The petitioner had filed its return of income under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ Act ] on 29.09.2016 declaring a total income of ₹93,23,40,477/-. The petitioner further claimed that an additional amount of ₹96,56,25,598/-, being income not chargeable to tax under the India–US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement [ DTAA ], was also earned. The petitioner company is a tax resident of the United State of America. Thereafter, the petitioner filed its returns for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22. The returns filed by the petitioner for AY 2016-17, 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2021-22 were selected for scrutiny. Draft assessment orders under Section 144(C)(1) of the Act were passed holding that the income which the petitioner claimed was not chargeable to tax was, in fact, chargeable under the Act as fees for technical services under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act. The petitioner filed objections to the draft assessment orders before the Dispute Resolution Panel [ DRP ]. However, the petitioner’s contentions did not find favour with the DRP, and the final assessment order was passed. The petitioner appealed the final assessment order before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [ ITAT ]. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was allowed by a common order dated 01.01.2025.

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 20:42:53

¶20

The petitioner’s grievance is that appeal effect order has not yet been passed and therefore, the refund due to the petitioner has not been processed. 6. Mr. Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue fairly states that four months have elapsed since the date of the order passed by the learned ITAT allowing the petitioner’s appeals, and that the appeal effect orders are required to be passed.

¶21

Accordingly, we direct the concerned authorities to pass appeal effect orders and process the refund due to the petitioner along with applicable interest, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from date.

¶22

The petition stands disposed of. The pending application is also disposed of.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

TEJAS KARIA, J

MAY 22, 2025 dr

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 20:42:53

Godaddy.Com Llc v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(3)(1)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Godaddy.Com Llc v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(3)(1)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of India & Ors. Vs Abhay Raj Pal

NTPC Retired Employees Welfare Association and Ors. Vs NTPC Ltd. and Ors.

Ge Steam Power Inc( Earlier Known as M/S Alstom Power Inc) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.

M/S Ge Power Gmbh ( Earlier Known as M/S Ge Power Ag and Ealier to That as Alstom Power Ag) Vs Assistent Commissioner of Income Tax Circle Int Tax 1(3) (1) and Anr.

M/S a.P.Apparels Vs the Labour Commissioner & Ors.

Siddhartha Kothari Vs Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation 3 & Anr.

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Vs Vodafone Idea Limited

Sahil Arora Vs Commissioner of Excise, Entt. and Luxury Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Ors.

Ge Steam Power Inc( Earlier Known as M/S Alstom Power Inc) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr.

M/S Ge Power Gmbh ( Earlier Known as M/S Ge Power Ag and Ealier to That as Alstom Power Ag) Vs Assistent Commissioner of Income Tax Circle Int Tax 1(3) (1) and Anr.

M/S Ge Steam Power Systems (Earlier Known as M/S. Alstom Power System Sa) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int Tax 1 (1)(1) and Anr.

Naveen Narang HUF Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 28 Delhi & Ors.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central Ludhiana Vs M/S. Garg Acrylics Ltd.