M/S EMBASSY ONE DEVELOPERS LIMITED vs THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 28198 OF 2026 (T-IT)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 28367 OF 2026 (T-IT)
IN WP No. 28198/2026
BETWEEN:
M/S EMBASSY ONE DEVELOPERS LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
14TH FLOOR, PINNACLE TOWER,
EMBASSY ONE, NO. 8, BELLARY ROAD,
GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 032.
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY,
SRI. DHARMALINGAM VIJAYKUMAR.
…PETITIONER
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA
N
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY., SENIOR ADVOCATE
FOR SRI. A MAHESH CHOWDHARY.,ADVOCATE A/W
SMT. KRISHIKA VAISHNAVI., ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
AND:
1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)
CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING,
QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), CENTRAL REVENUE
BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD,
BENGALURU 560 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.M. DILIP., ADVOCATE A/W
SRI. VINAYAKA S PANDIT., ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.08.2026
BEARING DIN AND ORDER NO. ITBA/COM/F/17/2026-
27/1092253344(1) PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1
UNDER SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,
1961, REJECTING THE PETITIONER-S APPLICATION
DATED 03.03.2026 FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN
FILING A REVISED RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE
ASSESSMENT YEAR 2021-22 AT ANNEXURE A, AS
BEING ARBITRARY, UNREASONED, ILLEGAL,
CONTRARY TO CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 11/2024 DATED
01.10.2024, OPPOSED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
NATURAL JUSTICE AND BAD IN THE EYES OF LAW;
B) DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.1 TO ALLOW THE
PETITIONER-S APPLICATION DATED 03.03.2026 UNDER
SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AT
ANNEXURE B, CONDONE THE DELAY AND PERMIT THE
PETITIONER TO FILE A REVISED RETURN OF INCOME
FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2021-22 CLAIMING
CREDIT OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE OF RS.
91,98,961/-; C) IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO PRAYER (B),
DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER AFRESH
AND DISPOSE OF THE PETITIONER-S APPLICATION
DATED 03.03.2026 UNDER SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AT ANNEXURE B ON MERITS,
IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND IN THE LIGHT OF
PARAGRAPH 6 OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 11/2024
DATED 01.10.2024, AFTER AFFORDING THE
PETITIONER AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING, WITHIN A
TIME FRAME TO BE FIXED BY THIS HON-BLE COURT;
D) DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.2 TO GRANT CREDIT
OF THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE OF RS.
91,98,961/- REFLECTED IN FORM 26AS OF THE
PETITIONER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2021-22 AND
TO REFUND THE SAME TO THE PETITIONER IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
IN WP NO. 28367/2026
BETWEEN:
M/S EMBASSY ONE DEVELOPERS LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
14TH FLOOR, PINNACLE TOWER,
EMBASSY ONE, NO. 8, BELLARY ROAD,
GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 032.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY,
SRI. DHARMALINGAM VIJAYKUMAR.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY., SENIOR ADVOCATE
FOR SRI. A MAHESH CHOWDHARY., ADVOCATE A/W
SMT. KRISHIKA VAISHNAVI., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)
CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING,
QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3),
CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD,
BENGALURU 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.M. DILIP., ADVOCATE A/W
SRI. VINAYAKA S PANDIT., ADVOCATE)
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
A) QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
24.08.2026 BEARING DIN AND ORDER NO.
ITBA/COM/F/17/2026- 27/1092524724(1) PASSED BY
RESPONDENT NO.1 UNDER SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, REJECTING THE PETITIONERS
APPLICATION DATED 11.03.2026 FOR CONDONATION
OF DELAY IN FILING A REVISED RETURN OF INCOME
FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2023-24 AT ANNEXURE A,
AS BEING ARBITRARY, UNREASONED, ILLEGAL,
CONTRARY TO CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 11/2024 DATED
01.10.2024, OPPOSED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF
NATURAL JUSTICE AND BAD IN THE EYES OF LAW;
B) DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.1 TO ALLOW THE
PETITIONER'S APPLICATION DATED 11.03.2026 UNDER
SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AT
ANNEXURE B, CONDONE THE DELAY AND PERMIT THE
PETITIONER TO FILE A REVISED RETURN OF INCOME
FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2023-24 CLAIMING
CREDIT OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE OF RS.
72,92,380/-; C) IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO PRAYER (B),
ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT,
ORDER OR DIRECTION OF A LIKE NATURE DIRECTING
RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER AFRESH AND
DISPOSE OF THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION DATED
11.03.2026 UNDER SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE INCOME
TAX ACT, 1961 AT ANNEXURE B ON MERITS, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, IN THE LIGHT OF
PARAGRAPH 6 OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 11/2024
DATED 01.10.2024 AND THE DECISION OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN MANYATA PROMOTERS PRIVATE
LIMITED (W.P. NO. 4829/2022 (T-IT)), AFTER
AFFORDING THE PETITIONER AN OPPORTUNITY OF
HEARING, WITHIN A TIME FRAME TO BE FIXED BY
THIS HON'BLE COURT.
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has filed Revised returns for
refund of the TDS effected by its Group Company
relevant to the assessment years 2021 - 22 and
2023-24. The petitioner's application for condonation
of delay in filing the Revised Returns and for refund
is rejected by the impugned orders. The details of the
impugned orders, which are impugned in the
respective petitions, are as follows:
Provisions
Orders Date of Income
Tax Act,
1961
28198/2026 Order 17.08.2026 119(2)(b)
Writ
petition
Number
28367/2026 Order 24.08.2026 119(2)(b)
2. Sri Shashikiran Shetty, the learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioner, submits that this Court
must intervene with the impugned order emphasizing
the following.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
[A] The petitioner's Group Company,
M/s.Embassy Inn Private Limited [ M/s.
EIPL ], had received Inter-Corporate
Deposits from the petitioner and though
M/s. EIPL booked the TDS on 31.03.2021,
it credited TDS to the Government's
account only on 31.03.2021.
[B] The Form 26AS did not disclose the TDS
effected as of the date on which the
petitioner filed its Returns.
[C] As such the petitioner has filed returns
without claiming refund of the TDS.
[D] After the TDS is credited, the petitioner
has filed Revised returns in the month of
March, 2026 along with an application for
condonation of delay stating that the
delay is because of the voluminous
transactions that the petitioner had to go
through as a conglomerate.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
[e] The application is rejected only because
the petitioner is described as a large
conglomerate without considering the
specifics though alluded.
The learned Senior Counsel submits that the order
dated 01.10.2024 in F.No.312/63/2023-OT is
categorical in stating that an application for refund
can be filed within five years of the applications filed
after 01.10.2024 and that it is also not disputed that
an application must be considered based on
assessment of genuine hardship as contemplated
under the Circular dated 09.06.2015 in No.9/2015
and that the impugned orders must fail because the
petitioner’s application is not considered in the light
of these order and circular.
3. Sri M.Dilip along and Sri Vinayaka S.
Pandit [ a learned senior standing counsel/learned
standing counsel for the respondents ] who accept
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
notice, are heard on whether there must be any
interference with the impugned orders. The reasons
assigned to reject the petitioner's application relevant
to the assessment year 2021-2022 in
W.P.No.28198/2026 read as under after there is a
reference to the delay in the Group Company
depositing the TDS to the government account.
9.3 Not claiming TDS deduction in the ROI filed by
the assessee on the pretext of not being
reflected in 26AS is very weak reasoning for
such a large conglomerate. The assessee, at
the time of finalization of its accounts had all
the time to ensure its receipts from all sources
so as to arrive at its total income apart from
ensuring that the corresponding TDS was
effected and deposited into the Government
account. The assessee had all the right to
stake a claim for the entire TDS rather than
restricting itself to claiming the TDS that was
reflected in the 26AS in the original return of
income filed on 15.03.2022.
9.4 Moreover, as already stated earlier, the TDS
deducted on 31.03.2021 was deposited into
st
Government account only on 31 March 2022.
Further, EIPL, another company of the same
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
group, which holds 45% of its stake, has not
furnished any reason for the delayed
payment of TDS into Government account.
Moreover, the TDS returns reflecting the TDS
deduction was filed on 07.04.2022 and
certainly from April 2022 end this TDS credit
was filed very much available in 26AS of the
assessee company and still the condonation
petition has been filed in this office after a
lapse of nearly four years on 03.03.2026.
The reasons assigned for rejection of the application
in the next petition [ in W.P.No.28367/2026 ] though
not verbatim the same are also for similar reasons.
4. It is salient that the question of genuine
hardship has to be examined in terms of the Circular
in No.9/2015 dated 09.06.2015 and the application
could not have been rejected only on the ground that
the petitioner is a conglomerate and the refund was
not claimed in the original ITR because TDS was not
reflected in Form 26AS as of such date. There is a
delay in filing the application for condonation of delay
because the Revised Returns are not filed
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
immediately after M/s. EIPL credited the TDS
deducted. The outcome on the application for
condonation of delay should have turned on whether
the petitioner is able to establish genuine hardship
offering reasons as contemplated under Circular
No.9/2015 especially when the right to refund is not
in dispute.
5. This Court, in these circumstances and
because the salient in terms of the Circular is not
considered, is of the view that there must be
interference quashing the orders restoring the
proceedings for reconsideration observing that the
application must be considered with reference to the
Circular in No.9/2015 dated 09.06.2015 examining
whether the reasons offered are sufficient to establish
genuine hardship by offering cogent reasons. In the
light of the afore, the following:
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
ORDER
A. The petitions are allowed-in-part and the
following impugned adjudication orders
are quashed.
Writ
petition
Number
Provisions
Orders Date of Income
Tax Act,
1961
28198/2026 Order 17.08.2026 119(2)(b)
28367/2026 Order 24.08.2026 119(2)(b)
B. The petitioner's application for
condonation of delay is restored for
reconsideration.
C. The petitioner shall without further
notice file a copy of this order for
reconsideration with the first respondent
on 23.11.2026.
D. The first respondent is called upon to re-
examine the applications in the light of
this Court's observation and
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:53975
WP No. 28198 of 2026
C/W WP No. 28367 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010618822026
communicate the decision within the
next six [6] weeks.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD)
JUDGE
SA
Ct:sr