NAVAL KUMAR CHHABRA, vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

WP/20151/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01042968202514 November 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the respondent, Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, to consider the refund claim and the petitioner's representations dated December 19, 2022, and August 28, 2023, together with applicable interest. The respondent was ordered to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the court's order. The court did not decide on the merits of the refund claim itself but focused on ensuring the administrative process of considering the claim and representations was undertaken. The issue of the specific amount of refund or interest was not adjudicated upon.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Naval Kumar Chhabra, representing Sri Satypal Chhabra (HUF), filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent, Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, to refund the tax paid under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme (VDIS) along with applicable interest. Alternatively, the petitioner requested the court to direct the respondent to consider his letters dated December 19, 2022, and August 28, 2023, seeking the refund and to pass an appropriate order within four weeks. The respondent's counsel submitted that the respondent would consider and pass necessary orders on the representations if reasonable time was granted.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to refund the tax paid under the VDIS scheme along with applicable interest? (Question of law and fact, concerning the petitioner's right to refund and the respondent's obligation). 2. Whether the respondent should be directed to consider the petitioner's representations dated December 19, 2022, and August 28, 2023, seeking refund and pass an appropriate order within a specified timeframe? (Question of law and fact, concerning administrative action and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner contended that his representations seeking refund of VDIS tax along with interest have not been considered by the respondent. He sought a writ of mandamus for the refund or, in the alternative, a direction to consider his representations. Revenue's Contentions: The respondent submitted that if reasonable time is given, the respondent would consider and pass necessary orders on the said representations.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47530 WP No. 20151 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 20151 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

NAVAL KUMAR CHHABRA, KARTHA OF SRI SATYAPAL CHHABRA (HUF) AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO. 133, 6TH A CROSS, 9TH MAIN, RAJMAHAL, VILAS EXTENSION, R. T. STREET, BENGALURU – 560 080 PAN NO.: AAIPC4269P …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALRAM R. RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WARD-6(3)(1), BMTC BUILDING, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORDERING AND DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS BY THEMSELVES, THEIR SUBORDINATE, SERVANTS AND AGENTS TO REFUND THE TAX PAID BY THE PETITIONER UNDER VDIS SCHEME ALONG WITH APPLICABLE INTEREST, AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47530 WP No. 20151 of 2025

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:- “i. A Writ of Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordering and directing the Respondents by themselves, their subordinate, servants and agents to refund the tax paid by the Petitioner under VDIS scheme along with applicable interest, and, ii. Without prejudice to the above the Hon'ble Court may direct the Respondent in the nature of Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordering and directing the Respondents by themselves, their subordinate, servants and agents to consider the letters submitted by the Petitioner to the Respondent on 19.12.2022 and 28.08.2023 enclosed as ANNEXURE – G and ANNEXURE – H to this Petition and to pass the appropriate order within 4 weeks. iii. Issue such other order, writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit; and iv. Direct the Respondents to pay the costs of this Writ Petition.”

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that his representation/letters at Annexures – G and H dated 19.12.2022

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47530 WP No. 20151 of 2025

and 28.08.2023 respectively submitted to the respondent seeking refund of the income tax paid along with interest, has not been considered so far by the respondent. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court by way of present petition.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that if reasonable time is given, the respondent would consider and pass necessary order on the said representations. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and rival submissions, the respondent is hereby directed to consider the refund claim and representations of the petitioners dated 19.12.2022 and 28.08.2023 at Annexures-G and H respectively together with applicable interest and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

MDS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 32

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →