The orders u/s 201(1) / (1A) were passed by the AO determining the tax liability with interest for the alleged default of non-deduction of tax at source for the payments made on various remittances for purchase, installation and supervision charges.  Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (Appeals) upholding the AO’s order, the Assessee filed the appeal before the ITAT, which had been decided in favour of the Assessee.  However, during the pendency of the appeal, on insistence of the department, the Assessee had deposited the outstanding tax amount with interest under the protest. The AO passed the orders giving effect to the ITAT’s order u/s 254 for a refund of certain amount, but not paid to the Assessee on the ground that the Assessee had not filed its application on TRACES portal in prescribed form 26B.   On Writ, the Hon’ble Court observed that Section 240 dealt with refund of any amount that becomes due to Assessee as a result of any order passed in appeal or other proceedings and mandates that the AO shall refund the amount to the Assessee without having make on claim on that behalf in the event of refund becomes due as a result an order passed in appeal.  The Hon’ble Court further observed that the non-functionality of the TRACES portal shall not be ground for denying the benefit arising out of the statutory provisions under the Act.  The Writ Petition has been disposed off with a direction to the department to complete the exercise within thirty days and accordingly, disposed of. (AY.2010-11, 2011-12)