RAMESH RAINA vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/1102/2025HC DelhiDLHC01003442202517 March 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court noted the submission by the Revenue that the petitioner's grievance had been addressed through a rectification order dated 06.03.2025 passed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This order rectified a demand of ₹2,77,870/- for AY 2012-13. Consequently, the court was informed that the refund due to the petitioner for AY 2024-25 would not be adjusted against any outstanding demand and would be processed in accordance with law. The Revenue's counsel made a binding statement to this effect. In light of these submissions and the rectification order, the court found no further orders were required to be passed in the petition. The petition was disposed of on this basis, with the operative direction being the processing of the petitioner's refund for AY 2024-25 as per law.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ramesh Raina, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated 13.12.2021 issued under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the withholding of his refund for Assessment Year (AY) 2024-25. The Revenue, represented by the Deputy Director of Income Tax and others, informed the Delhi High Court that the petitioner's grievance had been addressed. A rectification order dated 06.03.2025 was passed under Section 154 of the Act, rectifying a demand of ₹2,77,870/- for AY 2012-13. Consequently, the refund due to the petitioner for AY 2024-25 would not be adjusted against any outstanding demand and would be processed in accordance with law.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 13.12.2021 issued under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was valid and whether the withholding of refund for AY 2024-25 was justified. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner challenged the notice and the withholding of refund. The specific arguments are not detailed in the judgment, but the filing of the writ petition indicates a dispute regarding the legality of the notice and the subsequent action. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue submitted that the petitioner's grievance had been addressed by passing a rectification order under Section 154 of the Act. This order rectified a demand for AY 2012-13, thereby resolving the issue that led to the withholding of the refund for AY 2024-25. The Revenue stated that the refund would now be processed as per law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)(a),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1102/2025 & CM APPL. 5449/2025 RAMESH RAINA .....Petitioner Through: Mr Ronit Ranjan, Mr Indronil Mohan and Mr Rishav Vats, Advocates. versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr Sunil Aggarwal, SSC, Mr Shivansh B Pandya, Mr Viplav Acharya, Ms Priya Sarkar, JSCs and Mr Utkarsh Tiwari, Advocate. Ms Suruchi Mittal, SPC for UOI/R3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA O R D E R % 17.03.2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia¸ impugning a notice dated 13.12.2021 issued under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereafter the Act]. The petitioner also impugns the action of the respondent withholding of refund for assessment year (AY) 2024-25. 2. Mr Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue submits that the grievance of the petitioner has since been addressed and rectification order dated 06.03.2025 has been passed under Section 154 of the Act. 3. In terms of the said order, the demand of ₹2,77,870/- reflected as outstanding for AY 2012-13 has been rectified. 4. In view of the said order, the refund is due to the petitioner in respect of AY 2024-25 is not required to be adjusted against any outstanding demand. 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 01/07/2025 at 20:12:38

5.

Mr. Aggarwal, also submits that in view of the above, the petitioner’s refund for AY 2024-25 will be processed in accordance with law. The respondents are bound down to the said statement. 6. No further orders are required to be passed in this petition. The same is disposed of. Pending application is also disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J MARCH 17, 2025 M Click here to check corrigendum, if any 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 01/07/2025 at 20:12:38

More judgments on Section 154

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →