Manju Singh And Another v. …. Respondent(S

Sr.No. 202 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU CJ Court Case: OWP No. 561 of 2009 …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through: Sh. Gagan Basotra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Navdeep Kour, Advocate. Manju Singh and another v/s …. Respondent(s) Commissioner Income Tax and others Through: Smt. Aruna Thakur, Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICEHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE ORDER 1.Heard Sh. Gagan Basotra, learned Senior Counsel and Ms. Aruna Thakur, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2.The petitioners claim that they have only 50% share in the rental income of a residential house. They had been filing income tax return accordingly. For the Assessment Year 2005-2006, they claimed refund of TDS of Rs. 71, 369/- in respect of the rental income of the said house. The assessing authority vide order dated 25.01.2007 allowed partial refund of Rs.34,230/-. Not satisfied by the said order, the petitioners preferred Revision under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The revision was dismissed with a finding declaring the petitioners as the owner of the entire property. 3.The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the revisional court is not the proper court to declare about the rights of the parties in the property and therefore, the aforesaid finding/observation is unwarranted. 4.In case any such finding or observation has been recorded by the revisional court, the petitioners are permitted to move an appropriate application for recall/expunging the said finding. In case any such application is moved, the revisional authority will consider the same on its own merits independent of any finding recorded earlier or any observation made by this court most expeditiously preferably within a period of four months from the date of filing of such an application. 5.Insofar as the prayer made by the petitioners commanding the respondents to declare petitioner no.2 as the deemed owner of 50% of the aforesaid residential house, the same cannot be considered and granted by this court in exercise of discretionary jurisdiction as it is factual aspect which involves leading of evidence. 6.The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (JAVED IQBAL WANI) (PANKAJ MITHAL) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Jammu 15.02.2021 Raj Kumar