ROHIT BHASIN vs. PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTL TAXATION & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/11994/2025HC DelhiDLHC01055720202518 August 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition. The Court noted the submission by the Revenue that the petitioner was within their right to file an appeal against the Order dated 20.06.2023 passed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the appellate authority. The petitioner's counsel requested that the appeal be decided at the earliest due to the refund amount involved. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to file an appeal challenging the Order dated 20.06.2023 within one week. Furthermore, the Court directed the appellate authority to decide the appeal within four months of its receipt, considering the specific facts of the case involving a refund of Rs. 2,63,492/-. The appellate authority was also instructed to hear the appeal on merits without considering the issue of limitation, as the appeal was being filed based on this order. No specific finding was given on the merits of the application of Rule 37BA.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rohit Bhasin, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging an Intimation Order dated June 20, 2023, passed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a Rectified Intimation Order dated February 5, 2025, passed under Section 154. The petitioner contended that these orders were passed with the wrong and arbitrary application of Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, leading to the withholding of a refund amounting to Rs. 2,63,492/-. The petitioner sought quashing of these orders, a correct interpretation of 'Income' for the purpose of Rule 37BA, and the release of the refund. The Revenue, represented by the PR Commissioner of Income Tax, was also a respondent.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Intimation Order dated 20/06/2023 passed under Section 143(1) and the Rectified Intimation Order dated 05/02/2025 passed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were passed with a wrong and arbitrary application of Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 143(1), Section 154, and Rule 37BA). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the respondent authorities wrongly applied Rule 37BA, leading to the withholding of a refund of Rs. 2,63,492/-. They sought a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned orders and a writ of mandamus to correctly interpret 'Income' and grant the refund. They also sought directions for proper application of Rule 37BA and a correct assessment. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue, through its counsel, stated that the petitioner had the right to file an appeal against the Order dated 20.06.2023 passed under Section 143(1) to the appellate authority, and the same shall be decided by that authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11994/2025

ROHIT BHASIN

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahna, Mr. Vikram Kakar and Mr. Shiva Narang, Advs.

versus PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTL TAXATION & ORS.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Debesh Panda, SSC with Mr. Vikramaditya Singh, Ms. Zehra Khan, JSCs and Ms. Yashika Gupta, Mr. Anupam Jain, Ms. Nivedita and Mr. Shivang Berry, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R %

18.08.2025 1. This petition has been filed with the following prayers:

“a. Issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction in the nature to quash Intimation Order dated 20/06/2023 passed U/s 143(1) and Rectified Intimation Order dated 05/02/2025 passed U/s 154, both of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for being passed with wrong and arbitrary application of Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962; b. Issue of a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the respondent(s) to correctly interoperate the word “Income” on which the same is sued in terms of Rules and resultantly grant refund amounting Rs. 2,63,492/- which was withheld by the respondent(s) due to wrong and arbitrary application of Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962; c. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ quashing the illegal restriction of TDS Credit made and proper application of Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 within the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Respondent. d. Issue directions to the respondents to make a correct assessment by virtue of representation made by the Petitioner before the Respondents.” 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 23/08/2025 at 12:12:01

2.

The matter was adjourned for today. Mr. Panda states that he has instructions to convey to the Court that the petitioner would be within his right to file an appeal against the Order dated 20.06.2023 passed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the appellate authority and the same shall be decided by the said appellate authority. 3. The only submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner on the submission of Mr. Panda is that as the amount for which the petition has been filed is for a refund of Rs. 2,63,492/-, the appellate authority may decide the appeal at the earliest. 4. We direct that the petitioner shall file an appeal challenging the Order dated 20.06.2023 within a period of one week from today. 5. As the issue concerns refund of an amount of Rs. 2,63,492/-, we direct the appellate authority to decide the appeal within a period of four months on receipt of the appeal filed by the petitioner. 6. With the above, the petition is disposed of. 7. It is made clear that the direction to the appellate authority to decide the appeal within four months is passed in the peculiar facts of this case as it involves an amount of Rs. 2,63,492/- only. 8. It is also made clear, the appellate authority shall hear the appeal on merits without adverting to the issue of limitation as the appeal is being filed on the strength of this Order.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

VINOD KUMAR, J AUGUST 18, 2025/ss 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 23/08/2025 at 12:12:01

More judgments on Section 154

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →