CWP No. 2009 of 2019 -1- IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 2009 of 2019 Date of Decision: 23.7.2019 M/s Competent Authority-cum-Chief Administrator, Patiala Urban Planning and Development Authority, Patiala Petitioner Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1 (Exemptions), Chandigarh and others Respondents CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL Present: - Ms. Reeta Kohli, Senior Advocate with Ms. Chahat Aggarwal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Denesh Goyal, Senior Standing Counsel for respondent-revenue. ***** AJAY TEWARI, J (ORAL) 1. This petition has been filed against action of respondents in rejecting representation wherein petitioner had prayed for interest for wrongful retention of its amount. 2. admitted facts are that there was tax recovery against Patiala Development Authority. However, attachment was made of amount belonging to petitioner. 3. petitioner had challenged that attachment in this Court by way of CWP No. 16162 of 2014. said petition was allowed vide order dated 17.3.2015 and this Court held that amount was wrongly 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 29-07-2019 15:43:22 ::: CWP No. 2009 of 2019 -2- attached and directed Revenue to refund same. Revenue has refunded amount but rejected plea of petitioner for interest forcing petitioner to file this petition. 4. precise claim of petitioner is that once money which belonged to it was wrongly attached and retained by Revenue and was duly refunded, then it was entitled to interest for period during which money was wrongly retained. 5. In written statement, it has been accepted by respondents that money was wrongly attached and retained but plea taken to justify non-payment of interest is that there is no provision for grant of interest on any excess income tax which may be recovered. 6. Learned senior counsel appearing for petitioner has argued that she would have no objection with this proposition of law which has been sought to be advanced by Revenue but present is not case of recovery of excess tax but case where attachment and retention of money was made which did not belong to defaulter but belonged to different person. As per her, this wrongful attachment and retention could never be envisaged under Income Tax Act and, consequently, this attachment and retention cannot be related to any provision of Income Tax Act and interest which has now been sought is on general grounds of equity and fairness. As per her, claim which has now been made at rate of less than 10% for wrongful retention of money for period of about 15 months, cannot be said to be excessive by any standards. 7. In our opinion, arguments of petitioner must prevail. provision of interest in Section 244-A of Income Tax Act would have no applicability in present case because it is case of illegal 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 29-07-2019 15:43:22 ::: CWP No. 2009 of 2019 -3- attachment and retention. In written statement, Revenue has accepted that money was wrongly attached and retained. There can be no escape from payment of interest. rate of interest claimed also cannot be said to be excessive by any standards. 8. petition is allowed. interest of Rs. 3.68 crores be now paid to petitioner within two months from date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which there would be further interest applicable thereafter @ 9% per annum on this amount. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (HARNARESH SINGH GILL) July 23, 2019 JUDGE Gurpreet Whether speaking /reasoned : Yes Whether Reportable : No 3 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 29-07-2019 15:43:22 ::: Competent Authority-cum-Chief Administrator v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1 (Exemptions), Chandigarh and other