Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Ichhawar Distt. Sehore vs. The Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax Madhya Pradesh And Chhattishgarh

WP/3636/2018HC Madhya Pradesh11 March 2026Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA2 pages

For Petitioner: Pratyush Tripathi

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Madhya Pradesh held that the cause raised in the writ petition did not appear to survive. This conclusion was reached based on the repeated adjournments sought by the petitioner to ascertain the status of the matter, the lack of appearance by either party on multiple dates, and the observation that the disputed income tax demand was only Rs. 1,62,710/-, which the petitioner claimed as a refund. The Court found that the petition had been rendered infructuous and was also dismissed for want of prosecution. No specific findings were made on the merits of the refund claim itself, as the petition was disposed of on procedural grounds.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Ichhawar, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh seeking a direction for the Income Tax Department to refund Rs. 1,62,710/-. The case has a procedural history involving multiple adjournments. On 07.10.2023, the petitioner's counsel sought time to ascertain if the cause of action had become infructuous. On 03.11.2023, further time was sought. On 05.10.2023 and the current date of the order (11.03.2026), no one appeared on behalf of either party. The High Court noted that the cause raised in the petition appeared to no longer survive.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition seeking a refund of Rs. 1,62,710/- has become infructuous or not, and if the cause of action survives. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the refund of Rs. 1,62,710/-. The subsequent adjournments indicate an attempt to ascertain the current status of the refund claim and whether the matter was still alive. Revenue's Contention: No specific contention is recorded for the revenue as no one appeared on their behalf. However, the court's decision implies that the revenue's position, or lack thereof, contributed to the dismissal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL ON THE 11th OF MARCH, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 3636 of 2018 KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI ICHHAWAR DISTT. SEHORE Versus THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MADHYA PRADESH AND CHHATTISHGARH AND OTHERS Appearance: None appeared for petitioner. ORDER Per: Justice Vivek Rusia Perused the record. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents/Income Tax Department to refund a sum of Rs. 1,62,710/-. Vide order dated 07.10.2023, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner sought time to obtain instructions as to whether the cause raised in the present petition had become infructuous or not, and the case was adjourned accordingly. On 03.11.2023, learned counsel for the petitioner again sought time and prayed that the matter be listed after Diwali. On 05.10.2023, no one marked appearance on behalf of the parties, and today also no one is appearing on behalf of either of the parties. From the aforesaid, it appears that the cause raised in the present 1 WP-3636-2018 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:19287 Signed by: PRARTHANA SURYAVANSHI Signing time: 12-03-2026 10:55:02 Signature Not Verified

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE (PRADEEP MITTAL) JUDGE petition does not survive. Even otherwise, the impugned income tax demand is only Rs. 1,62,710/-, which the petitioner claims as refund. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous and for want of prosecution. Prar

2 WP-3636-2018 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:19287 Signed by: PRARTHANA SURYAVANSHI Signing time: 12-03-2026 10:55:02 Signature Not Verified

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →