Vimal Singhvi v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rajasthanjaipur, Income Tax Department, Ncrb Statue Circle,Jaipur.jaipur, Income Tax Department, Ncrb Statue Circle,

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6975/2022 Vimal Singhvi S/o Shri Champa Lal Singhvi, R/o 80, Kiran Marg,Suraj Nagar (West), Civil Lines, Jaipur-302006 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, RajasthanJaipur, Income Tax Department, NCRB Statue Circle,Jaipur.Jaipur, Income Tax Department, NCRB Statue Circle,Jaipur. 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-1, IncomeTax Department, NCRB Statue Circle, Jaipur.Tax Department, NCRB Statue Circle, Jaipur. 3. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Income Tax Department,Jaipur.Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.K. Kasliwal, Advocate withMr. Priyesh Kasliwal, AdvocateMr. Priyesh Kasliwal, Advocate For Respondent(s): Mr. Anuroop Singhi, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 31/05/2023 During the pendency of this petition, seeking relief of refundalong with the interest, it is informed by the learned counsel forthe respondents that out of total amount of Rs.2.27 Crores,substantial amount of Rs.2.16 Crores has already been refunded. As far as balance amount is concerned as also interest on thesame, learned counsel for the respondents submits that he hasnot received any instructions and reply is yet to be filed. Taking into consideration the subsequent developments,during pendency of this petition and particularly taking into consideration that substantial amount of Rs.2.16 crores has beenrefunded, though the claim of the petitioner with regard topayment of the balance amount as claimed by him towards refundas also interest, which has so far not been granted, nor the claimrejected by any speaking order, we are inclined to dispose off thispetition at this stage with a direction to the respondent toexamine the petitioner’s claim for payment of balance amount asrefund instead of adjustment as claimed by the petitioner as alsoto consider the claim for grant of interest in view of the provisionscontained under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 anddecide the same within a period of three months by a speakingorder. The petition is accordingly disposed off. The petitioner would be at liberty to revive the petition incase eventuality so arises and if grievance is not redressed. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J Karan/31