NEELAM KUNDAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS.

PDF · subscribers

CWP/8745/2022HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01041075202204 March 2025Author: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition based on the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent-Department. The court directed that the necessary actions, as stated by the revenue, would be completed within the stipulated period. Specifically, the court noted the department's submission that a corrigendum was issued for transferring the demand to the original PAN and that the transfer from Mumbai to Chandigarh would take time. The court accepted the assurance that the limitation period for filing appeals would commence from the date of PAN transfer and that the petitioner would be intimated immediately. No specific issue was left undecided; the decision was based on the departmental undertaking.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Neelam Kundan, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the Income Tax Department to rectify her Permanent Account Number (PAN) in the Assessment Order dated 06.12.2019 and consequential penalty orders. The incorrect PAN prevented her from filing statutory appeals. The revenue, represented by the Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 6(1), Mohali, submitted that a corrigendum dated 16.02.2025 was issued for transferring the demand to the correct PAN via manual order upload. The revenue further stated that the transfer of PAN from Mumbai to Chandigarh would take some time, and the limitation period for filing appeals would commence from the date of PAN transfer. Intimation of the PAN transfer would be provided to the petitioner on the same day.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should direct the Income Tax Department to rectify the Permanent Account Number (PAN) in the Assessment Order dated 06.12.2019 and consequential penalty orders to enable the petitioner to file statutory appeals? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning the procedural rights of the assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the incorrect PAN in the assessment and penalty orders was hindering her statutory right to appeal. Revenue's Contention: The revenue submitted that a corrigendum had been issued for the transfer of demand to the correct PAN and that the process would take time. They assured that the limitation for filing appeals would commence from the date of PAN transfer and that the petitioner would be duly informed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-8745-2022

Date of Decision:-04.03.2025 NEELAM KUNDAN … Appellants/Petitioner(s) Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS. ... Respondent(s) -.- CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN Present:- Mr. B.M. Monga, Advocate and Mr. Rohit Kaura, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Junior Standing Counsel for respondent-Income Tax Department assisted by Mr. Ravinder Kumar, Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward No.6(1), Mohali. **** LISA GILL

J .(Oral)

Prayer in this writ petition is for directing respondents to rectify/correct Permanent Account Number (PAN) of petitioner in Assessment Order dated 06.12.2019 (Annexure P-3) as well as in consequential penalty orders, so as to enable the petitioner to exercise her right of filing statutory appeals before the Commissioner, Income Tax (Appeals).

Learned counsel for respondent submits that the Department has issued corrigendum dated 16.02.2025 for transfer of demand to the original PAN of the assessee through Manual Order Upload/functionality. Intimation GAURAV SOROT 2025.03.11 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-8745-2022 to this effect has been given to the petitioner, however, some time shall be taken for transfer of PAN from Mumbai to Chandigarh i.e. the ward of the concerned Assessing Officer of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for respondent-Department, on instructions from Mr. Ravinder Kumar, Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward No.6(1), Mohali submits that needful shall be done within a period of 4 weeks and that limitation to file an appeal(s) shall naturally commence from the date on which the PAN is transferred. Intimation regarding the transfer of PAN shall be given to the petitioner/assessee immediately on the same date.

Keeping in view the above, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that needful be done in terms of statement made as above before us by learned counsel for respondent-Department, on instructions.

(LISA GILL)

JUDGE

(ALOK JAIN) 04.03.2025

JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2025.03.11 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →