Sheth Shree Karshandas Halu Dharamshala v. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption)
[Citation -2020-LL-0928-15]

Citation 2020-LL-0928-15
Appellant Name Sheth Shree Karshandas Halu Dharamshala
Respondent Name The Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption)
Court HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 28/09/2020
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags revision application • excess tax • refund
Bot Summary: Although the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs : A Writ of Mandamus or writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent to allow the relief claimed and/or pass order against revision application filed u/s 264 on 31.03.2016; delete the consequential demand raised u/s 143(1)(a) of Rs.19,44,180/- and allow the refund of excess tax paid of Rs.99,69,883/-; Pass any other order(s) as this Hon ble Court may deem fit and more appropirate in order to grant interim relief to the Petitioner; Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 30 07:52:24 IST 2020 C/SCA/17491/2019 ORDER Any other and further relief deemed just and proper be granted; To provide for the cost of this petition. Before us the limited relief prayed is for appropriate directions to the Commissioner of Income-Tax respondent no.1 to take an appropriate decision on the pending Revision Application under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 29th March 2016, within a fixed time frame after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The submission is that the said Revision Application is pending since March 2016, i.e. more than four and a half years, and as such, it needs to be decided expeditiously. On the other hand, Mrs.Bhatt, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Department, submits that within any reasonable time allowed by this Court the said Revision Application would be decided by the authority. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the respondent to take an appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law on the pending Revision Application referred to above within a period of two months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order after affording due opportunity of hearing to the assessee petitioner. Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 30 07:52:24 IST 2020 C/SCA/17491/2019 ORDER We make it clear that we have not entered into the merits of the matter and the Commissioner of Income-Tax is at liberty to take appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law on the basis of the materials on record.


C/SCA/17491/2019 ORDER IN HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17491 of 2019 SHETH SHREE KARSHANDAS HALU DHARAMSHALA JAMNAGAR Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) Appearance: MR. HARDIK V VORA(7123) for Petitioner(s) No. 1 MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for Respondent(s) No. 1 CORAM:HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIKRAM NATH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA Date : 28/09/2020 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIKRAM NATH) We have heard Shri Hardik V.Vora, learned counsel appearing for petitioner, and Mrs.Mauna M.Bhatt, learned counsel appearing for respondent Department. Although petitioner has prayed for following reliefs : (a) Writ of Mandamus or writ, order, or direction in nature of Mandamus directing respondent to allow relief claimed and/or pass order against revision application filed u/s 264 on 31.03.2016; delete consequential demand raised u/s 143(1)(a) of Rs.19,44,180/- and allow refund of excess tax paid of Rs.99,69,883/-; (b) Pass any other order(s) as this Hon ble Court may deem fit and more appropirate in order to grant interim relief to Petitioner; Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 30 07:52:24 IST 2020 C/SCA/17491/2019 ORDER (c) Any other and further relief deemed just and proper be granted; (d) To provide for cost of this petition. yet, before us limited relief prayed is for appropriate directions to Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption) respondent no.1 to take appropriate decision on pending Revision Application under Section 264 of Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 29th March 2016 (Annexure-A to petition), within fixed time frame after affording due opportunity of hearing to petitioner. submission is that said Revision Application is pending since March 2016, i.e. more than four and half years, and as such, it needs to be decided expeditiously. On other hand, Mrs.Bhatt, learned counsel appearing for respondent Department, submits that within any reasonable time allowed by this Court said Revision Application would be decided by authority. Considering facts and circumstances of case, we dispose of this petition with direction to respondent to take appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law on pending Revision Application referred to above within period of two months from date of production of certified copy of this order after affording due opportunity of hearing to assessee petitioner. Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 30 07:52:24 IST 2020 C/SCA/17491/2019 ORDER We make it clear that we have not entered into merits of matter and Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption) is at liberty to take appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law on basis of materials on record. (VIKRAM NATH, CJ.) (J. B. PARDIWALA, J.) /MOINUDDIN/ A. B. VAGHELA Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 30 07:52:24 IST 2020 Sheth Shree Karshandas Halu Dharamshala v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption)
Report Error