MS BHARAT RATAN DR BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR DALIT UTTAN AVOM SHIKSHA SAMITI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/10574/2025HC DelhiDLHC01048131202523 July 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court noted that the petitioner had provided an acknowledgment of the receipt of the rectification application dated January 8, 2024, by the respondents. Therefore, the receipt of the application could not be doubted. The Court directed that a copy of the application be provided by the petitioner's counsel to the Revenue's counsel within one week. Upon receipt of this application, the respondents were directed to decide the rectification application within a period of six weeks as an outer limit. The petition was disposed of in terms of this direction.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, MS BHARAT RATAN DR BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR DALIT UTTAN AVOM SHIKSHA SAMITI, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court. The petition sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to refund pre-paid taxes amounting to Rs. 4,89,690/- reflected in Form 26AS/Annual Tax Statement for PAN AAATB8903F, and a writ of certiorari to set aside the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the extent it denied this TDS refund. The petitioner stated that a rectification application under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was filed on January 8, 2024, with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi, but had not been decided. The Revenue's counsel could not verify the receipt of the application.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondents should be directed to refund pre-paid taxes amounting to Rs. 4,89,690/- to the Petitioner against PAN AAIAB8954D, as sought by the Petitioner in its writ petition. 2. Whether the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, should be set aside to the extent it denied the TDS refund of Rs. 4,89,690/-, as prayed by the Petitioner. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that a rectification application under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was filed on January 8, 2024, with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi, and that this application had not been decided despite due receipt. The petitioner stated they would be satisfied if the respondents decided this rectification application. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the Revenue stated that she could not verify whether the rectification application had been received by the Department.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~64 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10574/2025 & CM APPL. 43858-59/2025 MS BHARAT RATAN DR BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR DALIT UTTAN AVOM SHIKSHA SAMITI .....Petitioner Through: Mr Rajat Mittal, Mr Suprateek Neogi Mr Subham Kumar and Ms Kranti Agrawal, Advocates.

versus

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr Shlok Chandra, SSC, Ms Naincy Jain and Ms Madhavi Shukla, JSCs Mr Ujjwal Jain, and Mr Dhananjay, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

O R D E R %

23.07.2025

1.

This petition has been filed with the following prayers: “(A) issue a writ of mandamus and/ or any other appropriate writ(s) or direction in nature thereof directing the Respondents to refund the pre-paid taxes reflecting in Form 26AS/ Annual Tax Statement of the PAN: AAATB8903F, amounting to Rs.4,89,690/- along with interest, to the Petitioner against PAN: AAIAB8954D;

(B) issue a writ of certiorari and/ or any other appropriate writ(s) or direction in nature thereof to set aside the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 issued by Respondent no. 3 to the extent that it denied granting TDS refund amounting to Rs.4,89,690/- to the Petitioner;”

2.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that he would This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/07/2025 at 12:56:01

be satisfied if the respondents decide the rectification application, filed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. In support of his submission, he has drawn our attention to paragraph k at page no.17 of this petition wherein relevant averments have been made. He has also drawn our attention to page no.52 of the paperbook, which is annexure P8 in this petition. He also states that the said application has not been decided by the respondents, though the same has been duly received in the office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Civil Centre, Delhi on 08.01.2024. 4. Ms Naincy Jain, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue states that she cannot verify, whether the said application has been received in the Department. 5. As we find that there is a proper acknowledgment given by the respondents, the receipt of the application cannot be doubted. In any case, appropriate shall be another copy thereof be given by the counsel for the petitioner to the counsel for the respondents, to enable the counsel for the respondents send the same to the respondents within one week. 6. On receipt of the application dated 08.01.2024, the respondents to decide the rectification application within a period of six weeks thereafter as an outer limit. 7. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. The pending applications are also disposed of.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

SAURABH BANERJEE, J JULY 23, 2025/M This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/07/2025 at 12:56:01

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →