SMT.GURAWWA SHIVANAND NINGANUR, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Dated this the 28th day of March 2016 Before THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL Writ Petition Nos.101726-101727/2016 (T-IT) Between Smt. Gurawwa Shivananda Ninganur, Age: 51, Kasaba Rolli, Tq: Bilagi, District Bagalkot. …Petitioner (By Sri H.Kambiyavar, Advocate) A n d 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Opp. Civil Hospital, Dr. B.R.Ambedkar Road, Belagavi. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Bagalkot. ...Respondents (By Sri Y.V.Raviraj, Advocate) These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the 1st respondent herein to consider the application dated 26.06.2015 filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-C and direct the second respondent herein to consider the returns filed by the petitioner dated 25.05.2015 vide Annexures-B and B1 to this writ petition and to allow the claim of refund made by the petitioner.

: 2 : These writ petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day the Court made the following:- ORDER Petitioner is an agriculturist. Her lands have been acquired for public purpose that is to say, for the purpose of Upper Krishna Project during the year 2005-06. She has been paid compensation. At the time of depositing the compensation, the Special Land Acquisition Officer has deducted tax at source to the tune of Rs.69,001/- on the interest amount of Rs.6,90,012/-. As the Special Land Acquisition Officer had deducted TDS amount while paying compensation, petitioner claims to have filed returns of income for the Assessment Year 2011-12 and 2012-13 on 25.05.2015 claiming refund of the TDS amount by enclosing the original TDS certificate along with her returns. As there was delay in filing the returns, she had filed an application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act. The said application has been pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax, Belagavi. Hence, the petitioner has approached his Court seeking a

: 3 : direction to the 1st respondent to consider the application dated 26.06.2015 filed by the petitioner as per Annexure- C and the returns submitted by her so that the claim for refund could be allowed. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondents- Revenue authorities. 3. It is not in dispute that application filed as per Annexure-C and the returns submitted as per Annexures- B and B1 with a request for refund of the tax deducted at source has not been considered sofar. If that is so, respondent No.1 has to take steps to expeditiously consider the application Annexure-C and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 4. Hence, these writ petitions are allowed in part. Respondent No.1 is directed to consider the application within two months from the date of receipt of the order. Whereupon it will be open for the petitioner to pursue the

: 4 : matter in respect of returns filed as per Annexures-B and B1 and the respondent will pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE Kms