K.Krishnaraj v. The Income-tax Officer-I(2), Pondicherry / The Chief Commissioner of Income-tax-VI, Chennai / Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi
[Citation -2020-LL-1007-64]

Citation 2020-LL-1007-64
Appellant Name K.Krishnaraj
Respondent Name The Income-tax Officer-I(2), Pondicherry / The Chief Commissioner of Income-tax-VI, Chennai / Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi
Court HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 07/10/2020
Assessment Year 1992-93
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags judicial review • legal position • excess payment • excess amount • refund of tax • discretionary power • delay in filing return
Bot Summary: Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the Second Respondent dated 02.04.2004 in his proceedings F.No. HQ.21/01-02/17 and quash the same so far it relates to the Assessment Year 1992-93 and consequentially direct the Respondents to refund the sum of Rs.75,067/- paid in excess by the Petitioner by completing the Income Tax assessment of the Petitioner for the Assessment Year 1992-93. In W.P. No. 28159 of 2004 For Petitioner : Mr. N.Murali Kumaran For Respondents : Mr. A.P.Srinivas Standing Counsel ORDER Heard Mr. N.Murali Kumaran, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. A.P.Srinivas, Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondents, and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties. The Writ Petition challenges the proceedings in F.No. HQ.21(2)/01- 0217 dated 02.04.2004 passed by the Second Respondent under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 rejecting the claim for refund of excess amount of income tax paid by the Petitioner for the assessment year 1992-1993 as bared by limitation. The explanation sought to be given by the Petitioner in that regard has been found to be totally unsatisfactory, which could not be accepted. The connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.


W.P. No. 28159 of 2004 IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 07.10.2020 CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.D. AUDIKESAVALU W.P. Nos. 28159 of 2004 and W.M.P. No. 34197 of 2004 K.Krishnaraj Petitioner -vs- 1. Income Tax Officer - I (2) Pondicherry. 2. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-VI State of Tamil Nadu & Pondicherry, Ayakar Bhavan, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034. 3. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance & Company Affairs, New Delhi. Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records of Second Respondent dated 02.04.2004 in his proceedings F.No.HQ.21 (2)/01-02/17 and quash same so far it relates to Assessment Year 1992-93 and consequentially direct Respondents to refund sum of Rs.75,067/- paid in excess by Petitioner by completing Income Tax assessment of Petitioner for Assessment Year 1992-93. 1/5 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P. No. 28159 of 2004 For Petitioner : Mr. N.Murali Kumaran For Respondents : Mr. A.P.Srinivas Standing Counsel ORDER (through video conference) Heard Mr. N.Murali Kumaran, Learned Counsel for Petitioner and Mr. A.P.Srinivas, Learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondents, and perused materials placed on record, apart from pleadings of parties. 2. Writ Petition challenges proceedings in F.No. HQ.21(2)/01- 0217 dated 02.04.2004 passed by Second Respondent under Section 119(2)(b) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) rejecting claim for refund of excess amount of income tax paid by Petitioner for assessment year 1992-1993 as bared by limitation. In arriving that at conclusion, Second Respondent has referred to Section 239(2)(c) of Act, which stipulates that no claim for refund shall be allowed unless it is made within period of one year from last date of assessment year after 01.04.1968. decision of Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Niranjan Dass 2/5 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P. No. 28159 of 2004 -vs- Central Board of Direct Taxes [(2004) 226 ITR 489] has been cited in support of that proposition of law. 3. It is borne out from records that it was Petitioner who had delayed in filing returns for assessment year for which claim for refund had been made. explanation sought to be given by Petitioner in that regard has been found to be totally unsatisfactory, which could not be accepted. In any event, it is not been shown that any power has been conferred on concerned authorities to condone delay in entertaining such claim for excess payment of income tax. 4. Having regard to aforesaid legal position, that there does not appear to be any infirmity in decision making process of Second Respondent warranting any interference by this Court in exercise of discretionary powers of judicial review under Article 226 of Constitution. 3/5 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P. No. 28159 of 2004 5. In result, Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. 07.10.2020 4/4 kv/dm Index : Yes/No Note: Issue order copy by 04.11.2020. To 1. Income Tax Officer - I (2) Pondicherry. 2. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-VI State of Tamil Nadu & Pondicherry, Ayakar Bhavan, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai - 600 034. 3. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance & Company Affairs, New Delhi. 4/5 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P. No. 28159 of 2004 P.D. AUDIKESAVALU, J. kv/dm W.P. No. 28159 of 2004 Dated : 07.10.2020 4/4 5/5 http://www.judis.nic.in K.Krishnaraj v. Income-tax Officer-I(2), Pondicherry / Chief Commissioner of Income-tax-VI, Chennai / Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi
Report Error