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

CW/263/2024HC Rajasthan2024:RJ-JP:4823-DB30 January 2024Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN, SHUBHA MEHTA2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the petitions based on the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents. The respondents assured the Court that the refund for both Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2017-18 was being processed and that the issue with the bank account discrepancies had been resolved. They committed to deciding the matter pertaining to the refund within six weeks from the date of the order. The Court noted that the petitioner would be at liberty to pursue further remedies if their grievance persisted after the respondents' decision. No specific finding was given on the justification of the delay, as the matter was resolved by the departmental assurance.

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 resulted in a refund. The petitioner applied for this refund for Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2017-18. However, the refund was delayed due to an objection raised regarding the validation of the deceased's bank account. This delay prompted the petitioner to approach the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay in processing the refund for Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2017-18, due to issues with bank account validation, is justified. The petitioner argued that the refund was delayed despite the pending proceedings culminating in a refund, necessitating their approach to the High Court due to the bank account validation issue. The respondents, through their counsel, stated that the refund for both assessment years was being processed. They further submitted that the discrepancies concerning the bank account had been resolved and the refund would be decided in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of the order.

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 (Uploaded on 01/02/2024 at 11:01:07 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:26:12 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) (Uploaded on 01/02/2024 at 11:01:07 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:26:12 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →