CHAND RATAN VYAS vs. THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

CW/9654/2023HC RajasthanRJHC01047133202307 March 2024Author: PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI,MUNNURI LAXMAN3 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the prayer for cancellation of the existing PAN of the private respondent (respondent No. 3) was satisfied as the private respondent had surrendered the disputed PAN (AAQPV3256P) and obtained a new PAN (COXPV9465B). Regarding the refund of excess TDS, the Court directed that the petitioner would be required to file an online grievance to the CPC, Bengaluru. The Income Tax Department agreed to consider this grievance and decide it expeditiously within three months from the date of submission. The respondents were also permitted to assess the refund for the financial years 2020-21, 2021-22, and 2022-23 in accordance with law. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Chand Ratan Vyas, a retired professor, was using PAN AAQPV-3256P since 2002. He discovered that the same PAN was also held by respondent No. 3, Chand Ratan Vyas S/o Brij Ratan Vyas, since 1999. This dual usage led to erroneous tax liabilities for the petitioner. The petitioner sought cancellation of the private respondent's PAN and a refund of excess TDS with interest for financial years 2020-21, 2021-22, and 2022-23. The private respondent stated that he had surrendered the disputed PAN and obtained a new one. The Income Tax Department indicated that any refund would be processed according to law upon the petitioner filing a rectification application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the existing PAN of the private respondent (respondent No. 3) should be cancelled, considering it is also used by the petitioner? (Question of fact and law, concerning PAN allotment and usage). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the dual use of the PAN AAQPV-3256P by both himself and respondent No. 3 was causing erroneous tax liabilities and therefore, the PAN of respondent No. 3 should be cancelled. The petitioner would be satisfied if this prayer was granted and the Income Tax Department considered the refund of excess TDS strictly in accordance with law. Revenue's Contention: The Income Tax Department (respondents No. 1 & 2) stated that if the refund sought by the petitioner is processed, it shall be considered strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously, provided the petitioner files a rectification application by raising an online grievance to CPC, Bengaluru. The private respondent (respondent No. 3) contended that he had surrendered the PAN AAQPV3256P and obtained a new PAN No. COXPV9465B.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[2024:RJ-JD:11599-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9654/2023 Chand Ratan Vyas S/o Shri Baney Chand, Aged About 83 Years, Resident Of 5-E-6, Duplex Colony, Bikaner. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Income Tax Department, Grievance Redressal Mechanism, Ministry Of Finance, Through Directorate General Of Income Tax, Civic Centre, B Block New Delhi. 2. Government Of India, Ministy Of Finance, Income Tax Department, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward - 1(1), BKN, Aaykar Bhawan, Rani Bazar, Bikaner. 3. Chand Ratan Vyas S/o Brij Ratan Vyas, aged about 76 Years, Resident Of Bagri Mohalla, Bikaner. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Charu Mathur through V.C. with Mr. Apurva Raj Mathur For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Bhandari Mr. Yogendra Singh Chouhan HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

Order 07/03/2024

The present petition has been preferred with the following prayers: “A. The respondent authority may kindly be directed to cancel the existing PAN of the private respondent. B. The respondent Income Tax Department may kindly be directed to rectify the incorrect calculation of the Income Tax, refund the overpaid/excess deduction of TDS with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. for financial year 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-

23.

(Uploaded on 11/03/2024 at 10:38:43 AM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:01:38 AM)

[2024:RJ-JD:11599-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-9654/2023] C. Pass any other order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and just in the interest of justice and equity.”

The core of the problem was that the petitioner who is a retired Professor from Medical College, Bikaner was using Permanent Account Number (PAN) AAQPV-3256P, issued to him by the Income Tax Department since 2002. 3. The grievance of the petitioner was that the same PAN Number was being held by the respondent No.3 - Chand Ratan Vyas S/o Brij Ratan Vyas from 02.02.1999 which resulted into erroneous tax liability upon the petitioner.

Dr. Charu Mathur assisted by Ms. Apurva Raj Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall be satisfied if the PAN of the private respondent No.3 - Chand Ratan Vyas S/o Brij Ratan Vyas is cancelled and the Income Tax Department may consider the refund of any excess TDS strictly in accordance with law.

Mr. Yogendra Singh Chouhan, learned counsel appearing for the private respondent No.3 submits that the PAN No.AAQPV3256P has been surrendered by the private respondent No.3 and after surrendering the same, he has obtained new PAN No.COXPV9465B in accordance with law.

A copy of the new PAN, which has been linked with the SBI Bank Account Number of the respondent No.3, and the information received from the Bank that the same has already been taken on record by the Bank, both the documents are being taken on record.

Thus, the prayer ‘A’ of the writ petition has been satisfied. (Uploaded on 11/03/2024 at 10:38:43 AM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:01:38 AM)

[2024:RJ-JD:11599-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-9654/2023]

As far as prayer ‘B’ is concerned, Mr. Sunil Bhandari, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 & 2 submits that if the refund sought by the petitioner is processed, the same shall be considered strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously, for which petitioner shall be required to file rectification application by raising online grievance to CPC, Bengaluru.

Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees that the petitioner shall file such online grievance which shall be considered and decided forthwith within a period of three months from the date of submissions of the online grievance.

10.

It is also made clear that the respondents shall be free to assess the refund in question for the last three financial years i.e. 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23, in accordance with law.

11.

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J (DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 127-Ramesh/BhumikaP/- Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 11/03/2024 at 10:38:43 AM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:01:38 AM)

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →