KAMAL CHAND SURANA S/O LATE SHRI RAJMAL SURANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/260/2024HC Rajasthan2024:RJ-JP:4822-DB30 January 2024Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN, SHUBHA MEHTA2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petitions based on the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents. The respondents assured that the refund for both assessment years (2015-16 and 2017-18) was being processed, the discrepancy with the bank account had been resolved, and the matter would be decided in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of the order. The Court noted that the petitioner would be at liberty to avail further remedies if their grievance persisted after the respondents' decision. No specific finding on the legality of the delay was made, as the petitions were disposed of on the assurance of prompt action by the revenue. The ratio decidendi is that when the revenue assures prompt action and resolution of pending matters within a stipulated timeframe, the High Court may dispose of writ petitions on such assurances, reserving the petitioner's right to pursue further remedies.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kamal Chand Surana, is the legal heir of the deceased Smt. Prem Kumari Surana, who passed away on August 30, 2017. The deceased had pending proceedings before the Income Tax authorities which ultimately resulted in a refund. The petitioner applied for the refund for Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2017-18. However, the issuance of the refund was delayed due to an objection raised to validate the deceased's bank account. This necessitated the petitioner approaching the High Court. The respondents, through their counsel, submitted that the refund for both assessment years was being processed and the bank account discrepancy had been resolved. They assured that the refund would be decided in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of the order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay in the issuance of the refund for Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2017-18 to the legal heir of the deceased assessee, Smt. Prem Kumari Surana, is justified, and if not, what relief can be granted? (Mixed question of law and fact) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner, as the legal heir, is entitled to the refund due to the deceased, and the delay caused by bank account validation issues is causing hardship. Revenue's Contention: The refund is being processed, the issue with the bank account has been resolved, and the matter will be decided within six weeks as per law. No specific provision of the Income Tax Act was explicitly cited by the revenue in argument, but their submission implies adherence to procedural timelines for refund processing.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2024:RJ-JP:4822-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 260/2024 Kamal Chand Surana S/o Late Shri Rajmal Surana, Aged About 81 Years, Registered Legal Heir Of Late Smt. Prem Kumari Surana R/o Surana Enclave, Opposite Sms Hospital, Ram Singh Road, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2 Jaipur, 4 Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, 4 Th Floor Jeevan Nidhi, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur 3. Central Board Of Direct Tax, Through Its Chairman, North Block, New Delhi ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 263/2024 Kamal Chand Surana S/o Late Shri Rajmal Surana, Aged About 81 Years, Registered Legal Heir Of Late Smt. Prem Kumari Surana R/o Surana Enclave, Opposite Sms Hospital, Ram Singh Road, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2 Jaipur, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, 4 Th Floor Jeevan Nidhi, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Siddharth Ranka For Respondent(s) : Mr.Anuroop Singhi with Mr.NS Bhati (D.B. SAW/552/2026 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Uploaded on 01/02/2024 at 11:00:10 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:26:09 AM)

[2024:RJ-JP:4822-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-260/2024] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order 30/01/2024 1. These petitions are filed aggrieved of non-issuance of refund for the Assessment Year 2015-16 and 2017-18. 2. The petitioner is Legal Representative of Smt.Prem Kumari, who died on 30th August, 2017. The pending proceedings of the deceased before the Income Tax authorities culminated in refund. 3. The petitioner applied for refund but it was delayed as an objection was raised to validate the bank account of the deceased, forcing the petitioner to approach this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents relying upon the factual comments received from the Department submits that refund for both assessment years is being processed. He submits that the issue with regard to discrepancies in the bank account has been resolved and the matter pertaining to refund shall be decided in accordance with law within six weeks from today. 6. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the respondents, the present petitions are disposed of. 7. Needless to say that the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail remedy in accordance with law, if grievance survives after decision by the respondents. 8. A copy of this order be separately placed in the connected file. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Preeti Asopa /14 & 15 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (D.B. SAW/552/2026 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) (Uploaded on 01/02/2024 at 11:00:10 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:26:09 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →