SHIV SHANKAR RAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4, LUDHIANA AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/2961/2025HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01016534202525 February 2026Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,JUSTICE (TO BE NOMINATED)2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the petitioner's counsel, in light of the respondents' submission that the appellate order dated 13.02.2026 would be given effect to within six weeks, did not press the writ petition. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as not pressed. However, the Court directed the concerned authority to take necessary steps to give effect to the appellate order dated 13.02.2026 within the stipulated period of six weeks. The specific finding on the legality of the adjustment itself was not reached as the petition was withdrawn. The operative direction was for the revenue to implement the appellate order promptly.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shiv Shankar Rai, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana seeking to quash the adjustment of his refund for Assessment Year (AY) 2024-25, amounting to Rs.96,27,350/-, against an outstanding demand for AY 2021-22. The adjustment was made by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4, Ludhiana, and others. The petitioner also sought the release of the refund with statutory interest and costs. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner's appeal challenging the order for AY 2021-22, dated 27.12.2022, was decided by the Appellate Authority on 13.02.2026. This decision reduced the demand from Rs.13,09,35,023/- to Rs.13,09,350/-.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the adjustment of the refund for AY 2024-25 against the reduced demand for AY 2021-22 is legally tenable, and if not, whether the refund should be released with statutory interest and costs? (Question of law and fact, concerning the application of income tax provisions related to refunds and demands). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that following the appellate order dated 13.02.2026, which significantly reduced the demand for AY 2021-22, the adjusted amount of refund for AY 2024-25 should be released. The petitioner sought to give effect to the appellate order and release the refund along with interest and costs. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, through their counsel, stated that the appellate order dated 13.02.2026 would be given effect to within a period of six weeks.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CWP-2961-2025 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

294

CWP-2961-2025

Date of Decision : 25.02.2026

SHIV SHANKAR RAI

…. PETITIONER V/S

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4, LUDHIANA AND OTHERS

…. RESPONDENTS

CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI

Present : Mr.Nikhil Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner (through VC).

Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with

Ms. Nikita Garg, Jr. Standing Counsel and

Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Jr. Standing Counsel

for the respondents.

**** LISA GILL, J. (Oral)

Prayer in this writ petition is for quashing adjustment of refund of AY 2024-25 amounting to Rs.96,27,350/- against the outstanding demand for AY 2021-22 by respondents No.1 and 2, through adjustment challan serial number 26385, 32438 and 33756 dated 10.01.2025. Further prayer is for directing the respondents to release refund of Rs.96,27,350/- along with statutory interest and exemplary costs. 2.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that during pendency of this writ petition, appeal filed by petitioner challenging order dated ANJU GOEL 2026.03.10 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-2961-2025 -2-

27.12.2022 in respect to assessment year 2021-22 has since been decided by the Appellate Authority on 13.02.2026 whereby demand from the petitioner has been reduced from Rs.13,09,35,023/- to Rs.13,09,350/-. Therefore, it is prayed at this stage, that the amount so reduced and adjusted qua the assessment year 2024-25 be released; appellate order dated 13.02.2026 be given effect to. 3.

Learned counsel for respondents on instructions from respondent No.1 submits that order dated 13.02.2026 shall be given effect to within a period of 06 weeks. 4.

In view thereof, learned counsel for petitioner does not press this writ petition. 5.

Writ petition is accordingly dismissed as not pressed. However, it is directed that necessary steps be taken by the concerned authority to give effect to order dated 13.02.2026 within the time period as stated before us.

(LISA GILL)

JUDGE

(RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI)

JUDGE 25.02.2026 anju

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable

: Yes/No ANJU GOEL 2026.03.10 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →