Inthehighcourtofdelhiatnewdelhi+W.p.(C) v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Exemptions

$~66 *INTHEHIGHCOURTOFDELHIATNEWDELHI+W.P.(C) 10576/2025 & CM APPL. 43862-63/2025MS DALIT PRAHARI.....Petitioner .....Petitioner Through:Mr Rajat Mittal, Mr Suprateek NeogiMr Subham Kumar and Ms KrantiAgrawal, Advocates.Mr Subham Kumar and Ms KrantiAgrawal, Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS & ORS......RespondentsThrough:Mr Shlok Chandra, SSC, Ms NaincyJain and Ms Madhavi Shukla, JSCsMr Ujjwal Jain, and Mr Dhananjay,AdvocatesJain and Ms Madhavi Shukla, JSCsMr Ujjwal Jain, and Mr Dhananjay,Advocates CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAOHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE O R D E R23.07.2025 % 1.This petition has been filed with the following prayers: “(A) issue a writ of mandamus and/ or any otherappropriate writ(s) or direction in nature thereofdirecting the Respondents to refund the pre-paidtaxes reflecting in Form 26AS/ Annual TaxStatement of the PAN: , amountingto Rs 6,14,887/- along with interest, to thePetitioner against PAN: ;appropriate writ(s) or direction in nature thereofdirecting the Respondents to refund the pre-paidtaxes reflecting in Form 26AS/ Annual TaxStatement of the PAN: , amountingto Rs 6,14,887/- along with interest, to thePetitioner against PAN: ; (B) issue a writ of certiorari and/ or any otherappropriate writ(s) or direction in nature thereofto set aside the intimation u/s 143(1) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 issued by Respondent no. 3to the extent that it denied granting TDS refundamounting to Rs.6,14,887/- to the Petitioner;”appropriate writ(s) or direction in nature thereofto set aside the intimation u/s 143(1) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 issued by Respondent no. 3to the extent that it denied granting TDS refundamounting to Rs.6,14,887/- to the Petitioner;” 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that he wouldbe satisfied if the respondents decide the rectification application, filed under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3.In support of his submission, he has drawn our attention to paragraphk at page no.17 of this petition wherein relevant averments have been made.He has also drawn our attention to page no.53 of the paperbook, which isannexure P8 in this petition. He also states that the said application has notbeen decided by the respondents, though the same has been duly received inthe office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Civil Centre,Delhi on 08.01.2024. 4.Ms Naincy Jain, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue statesthat she cannot verify, whether the said application has been received in theDepartment. 5.As we find that there is a proper acknowledgment given by therespondents, the receipt cannot be doubted. In any case, appropriate shall bean additional copy thereof be given by the counsel for the petitioner to thecounsel for the respondents, to enable the counsel for the respondents sendthe same to the respondents within one week. 6.On receipt of the application dated 08.01.2024, the respondents todecide the rectification application within a period of six weeks thereafter asan outer limit. 7.The petition is disposed of in the above terms. The pendingapplications are also disposed of. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J JULY 23, 2025 M SAURABH BANERJEE, J