JOGINDER PAUL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/16215/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01088317202530 March 2026Author: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mandi Gobindgarh, had approved a refund of Rs. 1,22,17,323/- along with interest of Rs. 3,59,744/- under Section 244A to the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel submitted that this action rendered the writ petition infructuous. The Court accepted this submission. Consequently, the petition was disposed of with a specific direction for the approved refund, including the payable interest, to be released to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No issues were left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Joginder Paul, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging an action or inaction by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mandi Gobindgarh. The Revenue, represented by its counsel, produced a letter dated 19.03.2026 from the Income Tax Officer. This letter indicated the approval of a refund of Rs. 1,22,17,323/- along with interest of Rs. 3,59,744/- under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to be paid to the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel submitted that this development rendered the writ petition infructuous.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition has become infructuous in light of the approval of refund by the Income Tax Officer? (Question of fact and law) The petitioner contended that the approval of the refund by the Income Tax Officer, as evidenced by the letter dated 19.03.2026, rendered the present writ petition infructuous. The Revenue, through its counsel, presented this letter in court, implicitly acknowledging the refund approval and the subsequent change in circumstances. No specific arguments were recorded for the Revenue beyond the production of the letter.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 244A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.331 CWP-16215-2025 Date of decision: 30.03.2026 Joginder Paul ....Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present: Mr. Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Advocate Ms. Muskaan Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Tanya Kumar, Advocate for the respondents. * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)

1.

A copy of the letter dated 19.03.2026 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mandi Gobindgarh produced by learned counsel for the Revenue in Court today is ordered to be taken on the record as Annexure 'X'.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that through the afore letter dated 19.03.2026, the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mandi Gobingarh, has approved refund of Rs.1,22,17,323/- (with interest under Section 244A @ Rs.3,59,744/-) to be paid to the petitioner, rendering the present petition infructuous. JYOTI SHARMA 2026.04.01 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

CWP-16215-2025 -2-

3.

In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction that the afore approved refund, alongwith payable interest, be released to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE March 30, 2026 Jyoti 1 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No JYOTI SHARMA 2026.04.01 18:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

More judgments on Section 244A

All 1,186 judgments and leading authorities on Section 244A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →