Deepak Chaudhary v. Department of Income Tax

1. The petition has been heardby way of video conferencing.

2. Present writ petition has been filed seekinginterest in accordance with section 132B (4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that the Respondent has acted in an arbitrary manner ‘by sitting on the amount’ seized from the Petitioner for over four years after completion of assessment.He states that the Respondent did not pay any interest on the amount seized by the Department even though such interest is provided for in the statute itself,i.e. u/s 132(B)(4) for the period after expiry of one hundred and twenty (120) 2021:DHC:2015-DB W.P.(C) 6264/2021 Page[2] of 2 days from the date of last authorization of search and seizure uptillthe order of assessment is passed and thereafter at a reasonable rate of interest till realization of such amount.

4. Issue notice. Mr. Zoheb Hossain,Advocate accepts notice on behalf of Department of IncomeTax.

5. A perusal of the paper book reveals that the petitioner has been making representations since 12th May, 2017 for refund of the interest amount. However, no action hasbeen taken by the Respondent till date.

6. Consequently, thepresent writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax,CentralCircle-15, New Delhi to treat the present writ petition as a representation andto decide the same by way of a reasoned order within four weeks. All the rights and contentions of thepartiesare left open.

7. The order be uploaded on the websiteforthwith.Copy of the order be also forwarded to the learned counsel through e-mail. MANMOHAN,J NAVIN CHAWLA, J JULY 9, 2021 AS