Case LawHigh Court › M/S Hansa Agencies Private Limited, Jala...

M/S Hansa Agencies Private Limited, Jalandhar v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar And Another

High Court 01 Oct 2010 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
M/S Hansa Agencies Private Limited, Jalandhar v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar And Another
Date of order
01 Oct 2010
Assessment year(s)
1979-80
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In M/S Hansa Agencies Private Limited, Jalandhar v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar And Another, the High Court (2010) decided the matter.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH. CWP No.1131 of 1988 (O&M) Date of decision: 1.10.2010 M/s Hansa Agencies Private Limited, Jalandhar -----Petitioner Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar and another ----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present:-Mr. Rohit Sud, Advocate for the petitioner.Mr. Vivek Sethi, Standing Counsel for the revenue. Adarsh Kumar Goel,J. 1.This petition seeks direction for release of refund ofinterest due on the tax paid for the assessment year 1979-80. 2.Case of the petitioner is that assessment for the assessmentyear 1979-80 was annulled by order of the Tribunal dated 31.5.1985 asa result of which the petitioner became entitled to refund of tax withinterest. However, refund was made to the petitioner without interestwhich was against the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court,inter-alia, in Sandvik Asia Limited v. CIT, (2006) 280 ITR 643. Thepetitioner made application to which no response was received. 3.In the reply filed, claim in the writ petition has beencontested. 4.During pendency of writ petition in the last more than 20years, there have been several judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court including in Sandvik Asia Limited. In view thereof, a fresh decision may have to be taken. 5. Accordingly, we dispose of this petition with a direction torespondent No.2 to take a fresh decision on the claim of the petitionerin accordance with law within three months from the date of receipt ofa copy of this order. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge October 1, 2010‘gs’ (Rajesh Bindal) Judge
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan