Gaurav Somani v. Principal Commissioner Of Incometax -24 & Ors

$~17 IN THEHIGH COURTOF DELHIAT NEW DELHI+W.P.(C) 7420/2024 CM APPL. 30947/2024 GAURAV SOMANI .....PetitionerThrough:Mr Vaibhav Gupta, Advocate. versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX -24 & ORS. .....RespondentsThrough:Mr Ruchir Bhatia, SSC, Mr AnantMann, JSC Ms Aditi Sabharwal andMr Abhishek Anand, Advocates. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRUHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIAO R D E R03.07.2025 % 1.The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under:- “A. Issue an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamusor any other directing the Respondents to process theIncome tax return of the petitioner for the F.Y. 2014-15(A.Y. 2015-16) onwards and allow the credit of thetaxes paid by the petitioner;B. Issue an appropriate writ directing the Respondentsto ‘regularise/de-blacklist’ the PAN number of thepetitioner with the Income Tax Department;C. Issue an appropriate writ directing the respondent torefund the excess of Income tax paid by the petitionerduring the course of the filing of income tax returns andpayment of self-assessment taxes;” 2.The present petition was listed on 22.05.2024 and the respondents were directed to file the counter affidavit. Although the counter affidavitwas filed after several opportunities, it did not shed any light as to why thepetitioner’s PAN was black-listed. 3.After several hearings, on 16.05.2025, this Court passed, inter alia,the following order:- “3.The learned counsel appearing for the Revenuesubmits that the instructions from Central ProcessingCentre are still awaited.We note that thepresent petition has been pending before this Court foralmost one year and, as on date, we have no clue as towhy the petitioner’s Permanent Account Number has been blacklisted. 4.The counter affidavit filed also does not shedany light on the matter, except for stating that theconcerned authority is trying to ascertain the reasonsfrom the CPC. We clarify that if no reasons areforthcoming till the next date of hearing, this courtwould be constrained to proceed on the basis that thereare no valid reasons for blacklisting the petitioner’sPAN and consequential orders shall follow. 5.List on 29.05.2025.6.Thehearingscheduledon05.08.2025iscancelled.” 4.The learned counsel appearing for the Revenue states that the issueshave now been resolved and the PAN of the petitioner has been removedfrom the suspected fraudulent list. He states that the process to pass therectification orders for all the assessment years from 2014-15 are underprocess. 5.In view of the above, no further orders are required to be passed in thepresent case, except to direct the respondents to pass the necessaryrectification orders and process the refunds along with applicable interest, inaccordance with law, in a time bound manner – within a period of eight weeks from date. 6.The petition is disposed of in the above terms. The pendingapplication is also disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J JULY 03, 2025M TEJAS KARIA, J Click here to check corrigendum, if any