Dhiraj Kumar Singh v. The Assistant Commissioner Of
High Court
23 Dec 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Dhiraj Kumar Singh v. The Assistant Commissioner Of
Date of order
23 Dec 2024
Assessment year(s)
2011-12, 2012-13
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Dhiraj Kumar Singh v. The Assistant Commissioner Of, the High Court (2024) allowed the appeal.
Issue: 7.The question whether in the circumstances any further demand can be recovered from the petitioner is concededly covered by the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this court in Sanjay Sudan vs.
Decision: 10.The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~79
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 17845/2024
DHIRAJ KUMAR SINGH
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Archit Arora, Advocate.
versus
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX & ANR
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC with Mr. Anant Mann and Mr. Abhishek Anand, Advocates.
CORAM:HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICEHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
O R D E R% 23.12.2024
CM APPL. 75924/2024
1.Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2.The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 17845/2024
3.Issue notice.
4.Mr. Bhatia, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue accepts notice.
5.The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as
under:
“A. Exemption from filing clearer copies / retyped or with sufficient / exact margins / handwritten at this stage. / exact margins / handwritten at this stage.
B. Such further orders may also be passed, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
6.The demand against the petitioner in respect of the assessment years (AY) 2011-12 and 2012-13 relates to the tax that was deducted at source by the petitioner’s employer (Kingfisher Airlines).
7.The question whether in the circumstances any further demand can be recovered from the petitioner is concededly covered by the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this court in Sanjay Sudan vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. Neutral Citation No.2023:148:DHC:001342 dated 17.02.2023.
8.In view of the above, the impugned notices dated 12.09.2013 and 08.10.2018 raising a demand in respect of AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 are set aside.
9.The petitioner would be at liberty to seek a refund of amount that may have been adjusted against the demands for AY 2011-12 and AY 2012-13 by adjusting any refund due to the petitioner in respect of any other AYs.
10.The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
VIBHU BAKHRU, ACJ
DECEMBER 23, 2024
yrj
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.