Hari Krishan Fulwaria v. The Income Tax Officer (Ddo) Income Tax Office, Room
High Court
09 Oct 2023 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Hari Krishan Fulwaria v. The Income Tax Officer (Ddo) Income Tax Office, Room
Date of order
09 Oct 2023
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Hari Krishan Fulwaria v. The Income Tax Officer (Ddo) Income Tax Office, Room, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Counsel submitted that bypassing the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, the petitioner has approached this Court, hence, this petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative efficacious remedy.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
. s
s"' . ., . ,. & 4 .-: s HIGH C~UKT OF JUDI&A&U~ FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH r&%tJAIPUR t;r.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 965212021
Hari Krishan Fulwaria S/o Shri Nanu Ram, Aged About 56 Years, R/o E-94, Sidhharath Nagar, Girdhar Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur -302017.
Versus
I. Zonal Accounts Officer, O/o Of Chief Controller Of Accounts, Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue (Income Tax) Plot No. 10, Paota, B-Road, Jodhpur - 342010. Accounts, Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue (Income Tax) Plot No. 10, Paota, B-Road, Jodhpur - 342010.
2. The Income Tax Officer (Ddo) Income Tax Office, Room No. 28, Rani Bazar, Bikaner- 334001. No. 28, Rani Bazar, Bikaner- 334001.
3. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Refac) (Au)-I, Central Revenue Building, Rani Bazar, Bikaner - 334001. Central Revenue Building, Rani Bazar, Bikaner - 334001.
For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) For Respondent(s)
: Mr. Shati Mohammad Chouhan
Mr. Chandra Shekhat Sinha -
:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer: '(i) The orderlletter 16.03.2020 (Ann-4) and 22.07.2021 (Ann-9), may kindly be quashed and set aside and further the respondents may kindly be directed to make payment of due interest for the period of delay in payment of GPF amount. (ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to pay the interest on interest for period of continue delay in payment of interest on late payment of GPF till the final payment of interest. (iii) Any other appropriate order or direction, which may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may be issued in faovur of the petitioner. following prayer: '(i) The orderlletter 16.03.2020 (Ann-4) and 22.07.2021 (Ann-9), may kindly be quashed and set aside and further the respondents may kindly be directed to make payment of due interest for the period of delay in payment of GPF amount. (ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to pay the interest on interest for period of continue delay in payment of interest on late payment of GPF till the final payment of interest. (iii) Any other appropriate order or direction, which may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may be issued in faovur of the petitioner.
following prayer:
(iv) cost may be i the 'respondents for refusing to pay interest in-spite of clear rules."
2. By way of filing this petition, the petitioner is seeking directions against the respondents for granting interest on delayed payment of GPF amount.
3. At the outset, counsel for the respondents has taken plea that alternative statutory remedy of filing appeal is available with the petitioner to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'). Counsel submitted that bypassing the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, the petitioner has approached this Court, hence, this petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative efficacious remedy.
4. Head and considered the submissions made at the bar and perused the material available on the record.
5. Considering the arguments put forward by the counsel for the respondents, instant petition stands dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Tribunal by way of filing statutory appeal for redressal of his grievance, The petitioner would be at liberty to move an application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.
6. All application(s) (pending, if any) also stand dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
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.