SIGMA MOULDS AND STAMPINGS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 22(2), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/13745/2025HC DelhiDLHC01065331202518 November 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 based on the submissions made by the respondent. The Assessing Officer (AO) communicated that a refund of Rs. 15,09,080/- for AY 2007-08 had been re-issued to the assessee after rectifying the address issue, which had previously caused the refund to be undelivered. Furthermore, the AO assured that credit for a challan of Rs. 6,91,768/- would be provided to determine the remaining refund amount in accordance with the Income Tax Act. The Court directed the respondent to complete the follow-up action within eight weeks. The petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to seek revival if the action was not taken within the stipulated period. No specific issue was left undecided, as the Court acted on the assurances provided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sigma Moulds and Stampings Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking a mandamus to direct the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax to remit an income tax refund of Rs. 22,81,848/- for Assessment Year 2007-08, along with interest. The respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, stated that a refund of Rs. 15,09,080/- had been issued but not received by the assessee due to an incorrect address in the ITD system. The address has since been updated, and the refund re-issued. Regarding a challan of Rs. 6,91,768/-, credit would be given for determining the remaining refund amount as per the Act. The High Court directed follow-up action within eight weeks and granted liberty to revive the petition if action was not taken.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to remit the income tax refund of Rs. 22,81,848/- for AY 2007-08 along with interest? (Question of law and fact, concerning the right to refund and its timely disbursement). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought a direction for the remittance of the refund amount, implying a grievance regarding its non-receipt or delay. Revenue's Contention: The respondent stated that a portion of the refund (Rs. 15,09,080/-) was re-issued after correcting the address, and credit for another challan (Rs. 6,91,768/-) would be considered for the remaining refund amount as per the Act. This indicates an attempt to resolve the refund issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 13745/2025 SIGMA MOULDS AND STAMPINGS PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Aditya Gupta, Adv. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 22(2), DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC, Mr. V K Saksena, JSC, Ms. Hemlata Rawat, JSC, Mr. Dipak Raj, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR O R D E R % 18.11.2025 1. On the last date of hearing, we passed the following order:- “1. This petition has been filed with the following prayer : “{a) Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing, commanding and requiring the respondents to remit to the bank account of the petitioner income tax refund amounting to Rs. 22,81,848/- for the assessment year 2007-08 along with interest.” 2. Mr. V.K. Saksena, learned counsel appearing for the respondent states that additional affidavit shall be filed on the prayer sought in the Writ Petition, within two weeks from today. 3. Renotify on 18.11.2025.” 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 26/11/2025 at 12:06:17

2.

Today, Mr. Anurag Ojha learned Senior Standing Counsel appears for the respondent and states he has instructions from the Assessing Officer (AO) vide a communication dated 18.11.2025, in the following manner: “Comments of AO: In respect to the refund for the A.Y. 2007- 08, vide the rectification order dated 13.12.2024 u/s 154, refund amounting to Rs. 15,09,080/- issued to the assess but not received by the assessee due to “Address does not exists” as per ITD System, the Address has been updated and refund has been re-issued. Further, with respect to the challan of Rs. 6,91,768/-, credit of this challan will also be given for determining of remaining amount of refund as per Act. This issue with the prior approval of PCIT-07, Delhi.” 3. If that be so, we direct that the follow up action pursuant to the stand taken by the AO shall be undertaken within a period of eight weeks as an outer limit. 4. We dispose of the petition, granting liberty to the petitioner, if in the eventuality the follow up action is not taken within eight weeks as an outer limit to file an application for the revival of the petition. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J VINOD KUMAR, J NOVEMBER 18, 2025 rt 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 26/11/2025 at 12:06:17

More judgments on Section 154

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →