MS DALIT PRAHARI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/10576/2025HC DelhiDLHC01048133202523 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 High Court of Delhi disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to decide the rectification application filed by the petitioner under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court noted that the application was filed on January 8, 2024, and acknowledged by the respondents. The Revenue's inability to verify receipt was overcome by the existence of an acknowledgment. The Court directed that an additional copy of the application be provided by the petitioner's counsel to the respondent's counsel within one week. Upon receipt of this application, the respondents were mandated to decide the rectification application within a period of six weeks as an outer limit. The Court did not decide the merits of the refund claim itself but focused on ensuring the procedural remedy of deciding the rectification application was pursued. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, MS Dalit Prahari, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the respondents to refund prepaid taxes amounting to Rs. 6,14,887/-, as reflected in Form 26AS/Annual Tax Statement, and a certiorari to set aside the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which 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 it remained undecided. The Revenue's counsel could not verify the receipt of the application. The High Court noted the acknowledgment of receipt by the respondents.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to a refund of prepaid taxes amounting to Rs. 6,14,887/- as reflected in Form 26AS/Annual Tax Statement, and whether the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, erred in denying this TDS refund? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 143(1) and TDS provisions). 2. Whether the rectification application filed by the Petitioner under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, should be decided by the Respondents? (Question of procedure and administrative obligation). Assessee's Contentions: The Petitioner argued that they are entitled to the TDS refund of Rs. 6,14,887/- and that their rectification application filed on January 8, 2024, has not been decided by the respondents despite due receipt. They relied on the averments in their petition and Annexure P8. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue's counsel stated that they could not verify whether the rectification application had been received by the Department.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~66 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10576/2025 & CM APPL. 43862-63/2025 MS DALIT PRAHARI .....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:AAATD7221Q, amounting to Rs 6,14,887/- along with interest, to the Petitioner against PAN: AAGAD9195E; (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.6,14,887/- to the Petitioner;” 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that he would be satisfied if the respondents decide the rectification application, filed 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 01/08/2025 at 12:56:51

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.53 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 cannot be doubted. In any case, appropriate shall be an additional 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 01/08/2025 at 12:56:51

More judgments on Section 154

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →