RAMA HANDICRAFTS vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4

CW/724/2024HC RajasthanRJHC02002853202418 January 2024Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SHUBHA MEHTA2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction. It held that if the refund orders passed by the authorities on September 2, 2022, and August 29, 2022, concerning assessment years 2004-05, 2006-07, and 2012-13, have not been stayed or set aside by any higher authority in any other proceedings, then the amounts shall be released forthwith. The court set an outer limit of six weeks for the release of the refunds. The reasoning was based on the existence of valid refund orders and the absence of any recorded stay or setting aside of these orders. The operative direction was for the immediate release of the refunds.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rama Handicrafts, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent, the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Jaipur, in releasing refunds for assessment years 2004-05, 2006-07, and 2012-13. The petitioner stated that refund orders were issued on September 2, 2022, for Rs. 38,39,849/-, and on August 29, 2022, for Rs. 21,57,517/- and Rs. 1,10,143/-. Despite these orders and subsequent representations, the refunds had not been released. The respondent's counsel sought time to obtain instructions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondent authority has failed to act in accordance with law by not releasing the income tax refunds due to the petitioner for assessment years 2004-05, 2006-07, and 2012-13, despite valid refund orders being issued. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the respondent's inaction in releasing the refunds, even after the issuance of refund orders by the competent authority on specific dates and for specific amounts, constitutes a failure to perform their statutory duty. They relied on the fact that refund orders were issued and representations were made without success. Revenue's Contention: The respondent's counsel, on advance copy, prayed for time to seek instructions, indicating a need to investigate the reasons for non-release of the refunds.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2024:RJ-JP:3185-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 724/2024 Rama Handicrafts, At A-8 Central Spine, Vidhyadhar Nagar Jaipur 302023, Rajasthan Through Its Partner Jagdish Narayan Chhipa S/o Radhey Shyam Chhipa Aged About 65 Years Residing At 3994 B Behind Oil Mill Nahargarh Road Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle-4, Jaipur N C R Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur 302-005 ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajat Sharma Mr. Aryan Singh Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak Mr. Jaya P. Pathak HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order 18/01/2024 Mr. Sandeep Pathak, advocate, on advance copy, enters appearance on behalf of respondent. The petitioner has filed instant petition aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent in not releasing the refund of petitioner of assessment years 2004-05, 2006-07, 2012-2013. In the petition, it has been stated that even though the competent authority has issued refund orders on 02.09.2022 for an amount of Rs.38,39,849/- and on 29.08.2022 for an amount of Rs.21,57,517/- and on 29.08.2022 for an amount of Rs.1,10,143/-, the amount is not being refunded despite all efforts made and representation made.

[2024:RJ-JP:3185-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-724/2024] Though learned counsel for the respondent on advance copy prays for some time to seek instructions, we are inclined to dispose off this petition at the stage with the direction that if the orders of refund passed by various authorities on 02.09.2022, 29.08.2022 and 29.08.2022 in respect of assessment years 2004- 05, 2006-07 and 2012-13 respectively have not been stayed or set aside by any other higher authority in any proceedings, the amount shall be released forthwith within an outer limit of six weeks. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ LAKSHYA-DAKSH/26

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →