Link Quest Technologies Limited Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax TDS Delhi I New Delhi & Anr

Delhi High Court 5 Oct 2020 Civil Writ Petition No. 7406 Of 2020, Civil Miscellaneous No. 24789, 24791 Of 2020 (2020) 10 DEL CK 0013
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Civil Writ Petition No. 7406 Of 2020, Civil Miscellaneous No. 24789, 24791 Of 2020

Hon'ble Bench

Manmohan, J; Sanjeev Narula, J

Advocates

Rajat Mittal, Ruchir Bhatia

Final Decision

Disposed Of

Acts Referred
  • Income Tax Rules, 1962 - Rule 28AA
  • Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 197, 264

Judgement Text

Translate:

Manmohan, J

1. The petition has been listed before this Bench by the Registry in view of the urgency expressed therein. The same has been heard by way of video

conferencing.

2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging impugned TDS Certificate under Reference No. 197(1)206C(9)/AAACL1613M/2020-21/1 dated

01st July, 2020 and in the alternative, directions to the respondents to pass an order in the revision application filed by the petitioner dated 14th July,

2020. Petitioner also prays for directions to the respondent authorities to issue a fresh Certificate of Tax Deduction at Source at lower rate.

3. Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that vide order dated 09th December, 2019 in W.P.(C) 9621/2019 filed by the petitioner, this Court had

directed the respondents to issue the TDS Certificate for the last financial year 2019-20 to the petitioner at a lower rate of 1% as well as to adjust the

excess amount of TDS deducted in the past. He submits that despite clear directions of this Court, Respondents No. 1 & 2 have once again issued the

TDS Certificate to the petitioner for the Financial Year 2020-21 at 1.5%.

4. He contends that the assessing officer is bound to indicate reasons for allowing or disallowing an application under Section 197 of the Act and that

rejection of application under Section 197 of the Act read with Rule 28AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 does not lie within the absolute discretion of

the assessing authority.

5. Issue notice.

6. Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents.

7. A perusal of the file reveals that the petitioner has preferred a revision application dated 14th July, 2020 under Section 264 of the Act, which is still

pending. Accordingly, the present writ petition and pending applications are disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 to decide the

petitioner’s revision application within four weeks, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, by way of a reasoned order in

accordance with law. All the rights and contentions of the parties are left open. This Court clarifies, at the cost of repetition, that in view of the

pendency of the revision application of the petitioner, it has not dealt with the specific prayer for quashing of the order dated 01st July, 2020.

8. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More