Wp(C)/29786/2018 Of Bharat Varma v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-Cpc
High Court
11 Sep 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Wp(C)/29786/2018 Of Bharat Varma v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-Cpc
Date of order
11 Sep 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp(C)/29786/2018 Of Bharat Varma v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-Cpc, the High Court (2018) 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 KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
TUESDAY ,THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 20TH BHADRA, 1940
WP(C).No. 29786 of 2018
PETITIONERS:
1BHARAT VARMAAGED 69 YEARS
'SUBHA', RAGHAVAPARAMBU, ELAMANA ROAD, THRIPUNITHARA, ERNAKULAM - 682301
2SHARAT BHARAT VARMA'SUBHA', RAGHAVAPARAMBU, ELAMANA ROAD, THRIPUNITHARA, ERNAKULAM - 682301
REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER 1ST PETITIONER
SRI. BHARAT VARMA, 'SUBHA', RAGHAVAPARAMBU, ELAMANA ROAD, THRIPUNITHARA, ERNAKULAM - 682301
BY ADVS.
ANIL D. NAIR
SRI.ACHYUT K PADMARAJSRI.SREEJITH R.NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CPCBANGALORE 560001
2ASSISTANT COMMISSIONERINCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), NON CORP, 3RD FLOOR C R BUILDING I S PRESS ROAD, KOCHI - 682018
INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1), NON CORP, 3RD FLOOR C R
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are the legal heirs of the deceased assessee. As thedeceased assessee was entitled to refund under the Income Tax Act, theDepartment drew cheques and sent them to the assessee, by then deceased.
The legal heirs returned the cheques to the Department, requesting for therefund vouchers in their names. They also seem to have produced the LegalHeirship Certificate, as the Department desired.
2.
But the Department did not upload the confirmation of Legal
Heirship Certificate, electronically. Therefore, complaining about thedelay in their getting the refund, the petitioners, the legal heirs, have filedthis Writ Petition.
3.
In response to the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel,
the learned Standing Counsel assures that the Department will explore theoptions to rely on the physical copy of the document and process thepetitioners' request for refund.
Recording this submission, I dispose of the Writ Petition. I reckon thatgiven the delay that has already taken place, the Department may act
expeditiously.
Sd/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
NIL
// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE
SD
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.