PADMARANI KAPALA vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 10 AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/7400/2025HC DelhiDLHC01034337202501 September 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to issue the consequential refund within a period of six weeks as an outer limit. The Court took the submissions on record, including the petitioner's prayer for refund and penal interest. The Court did not explicitly rule on the entitlement to penal interest but granted the primary relief of refund within a specified timeframe. If the amount was not released within this period, the petitioner was granted liberty to file an application for revival of the writ petition. The Court's decision was based on the need to ensure compliance with prior orders and to provide a resolution within a defined period, given the lack of specific instructions from the revenue.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Padmarani Kapala, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking a refund and penal interest. This refund was purportedly due pursuant to an order dated January 21, 2016, passed by the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) and a rectification order dated March 16, 2015, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, for Assessment Year 2012-13. The petitioner sought a direction for the respondents (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and others) to issue the consequential refund with interest. On a previous hearing, the respondents' counsel sought time to obtain instructions. The Court noted the petitioner's prayers for the refund and penal interest and directed that the refund be made within six weeks as an outer limit.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund and penal interest for Assessment Year 2012-13 in compliance with the orders dated January 21, 2016 (CWT(A)) and March 16, 2015 (Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax)? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the refund and penal interest are due based on the aforementioned orders and that the non-issuance of the refund is unjust and arbitrary. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to issue the refund and grant penal interest. Revenue's Contention: The respondents' counsel stated on a previous date that they could not obtain any instructions regarding the matter.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7400/2025 PADMARANI KAPALA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Himanshi Goel, Adv. versus PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 10 AND ORS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh and Mr. Yojit Pareek, JSCs and Mr. Surya Jindal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR O R D E R %

01.09.2025 1. On the last date of hearing, we have passed the following order:- “1. The petitioner is seeking refund pursuant to the compliance of the order dated 21.01.2016 passed by the learned CWT(A) and the rectification order dated 16.03.2015 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax for the Assessment Year 2012-13 with interest. 2. On a specific query to the learned counsel for the respondents, as to what are his instructions, he states that he could not obtain any instructions. 3. Appropriate shall be instructions be taken positively within a period of two weeks from today” 2. The petition has been filed with the following prayers:- “a) Issue a Writ Petition Under Articles 226 And 227 of the constitution of india praying for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order directing the respondents to issue 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 03/09/2025 at 12:15:10

the consequential refund in compliance of order dated 21.01.2016 passed by LD CWT(A) and rectification order dated 16.03.2015 passed by the ld. assistant commissioner of wealth tax for ay 2012- 13 with interest as the non-issuance of refund is unjust, arbitrary b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing Respondent No. 1 to grant the penal interest to the Petitioner as applicable; c) Award costs of litigation to the Petitioner and grant compensation for the legal cost, harassment, inconvenience, and undue hardship caused due to the inaction and failure of the Respondents;” 3. The petitioner is seeking the refund in compliance of the order dated 21.01.2016 and also a different order of 16.03.2015. The refund in terms of the prayers made in the writ petition shall be made within a period of six weeks, as an outer limit. 4. With the above, taking the submissions on record, we dispose of the writ petition. 5. If the amount in terms of the prayer is not released, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an application for revival of the writ petition. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J VINOD KUMAR, J SEPTEMBER 01, 2025 cd 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 03/09/2025 at 12:15:10

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →