KARSAN KUMAR vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX-1 (INV.)

CW/21116/2024HC Rajasthan2025:RJ-JD:153409 January 2025Bench: NUPUR BHATI2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, in light of the limited submission made by the petitioners' counsel, directed that the petitioners shall file a representation/application before respondents Nos. 1 and 2 (Deputy Director of Income Tax and Principal Director of Income Tax) within 10 days from the date of the order. The court further directed that the representation of the petitioners shall be decided by the said respondents by passing a speaking order, strictly in accordance with law, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The principle established is that administrative authorities should consider and decide representations in a timely and lawful manner, especially when supported by directions from other relevant authorities. The instant writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Karsan Kumar and others, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur. They sought a direction for the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation) and the Principal Director (Investigation) to consider their representation. This representation was to be made in light of a communication dated October 18, 2024, from the Returning Officer (SDM), Sirohi. The Returning Officer had directed the Income Tax Department to refund an amount that had been confiscated. The petitioners are seeking the refund of this confiscated amount. The writ petition was filed against the Deputy Director of Income Tax, the Principal Director of Income Tax, the District Electoral Officer (Collector), Sirohi, and the Returning Officer (SDM), Sirohi.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondents, the Deputy Director of Income Tax and the Principal Director of Income Tax, should be directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners in light of the communication dated 18.10.2024 from the Returning Officer (SDM), Sirohi, directing the refund of confiscated amount. (Question of procedural fairness and administrative direction). Assessee's Contention: The petitioners, through their learned counsel, made a limited submission that the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 (Income Tax authorities) should be directed to consider and decide their representation. They specifically referred to the communication dated 18.10.2024 from the Returning Officer (SDM), Sirohi, which directed the Income Tax Department to refund the confiscated amount. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue's side regarding the issues raised by the petitioners. The focus was on the limited submission made by the petitioners' counsel.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JD:1534] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21116/2024 1. Karsan Kumar S/o Devraj, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Maruwara, District Sanchore-Rajasthan. 2. Krishan Kumar S/o Rayma Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/ o Village Pal, Tehsil Raniwara District Sanchore- Rajasthan. 3. Orasa Bhai S/o Isamal Bhai Musla, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Vasan Ghanera, Gujarat. 4. Vasna Ram S/o Kheta Ram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Maruwara, District Sanchore-Rajasthan. 5. Hoti Ram S/o Prahlada Ram, Aged About 58 Years, Maruwara, District Sanchore-Rajasthan. 6. Hakma Ram S/o Kheta Ram, Aged About 52 Years, Maruwara, District Sanchore-Rajasthan. 7. Masru Ram Dewasi S/o Punja Ji, Aged About 47 Years, Maruwara, District Sanchore-Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Deputy Director Of Income Tax-1 (Inv.), Aaykar Bhawan, Paota C-Road, Lal Medan, Jodhpur Rajasthan. 2. Pr. Dit (Inv.), Second Floor, New Central Revenue Building, Statute Circle Janpath, Jaipur. 3. District Electoral Officer (Collector), Sirohi. 4. Returning Officer (Sdm), Constituency Area 146, Sirohi District Sirohi. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ripudaman Singh HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI Order 09/01/2025 1. Learned counsel representing the petitioner’s, at the outset, makes a limited submission that the respondents Nos.1 and 2 may (Uploaded on 09/01/2025 at 05:05:40 PM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:17:08 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:1534] (2 of 2) [CW-21116/2024] be directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in light of the communication dated 18.10.2024 (Annexure-5), passed by the Returning Officer (SDM), Sirohi, wherein, he has directed the Income Tax Department to refund the amount which was confiscated. 2. In light of such limited submission, it is hereby directed that the petitioner shall file a representation/application before the respondents Nos.1 and 2 for ventilating their grievances within a period of ‘10 days’ from today. The representation of the petitioner shall be decided by way of passing a speaking order strictly in accordance with law within a period of ‘one month’ from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 3. With the aforesaid direction, the instant writ petition is disposed of. Stay application as well as all other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (DR. NUPUR BHATI),J 282-/Devesh/- Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 09/01/2025 at 05:05:40 PM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:17:08 PM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →