Case LawHigh Court › Wtax/1003/2022 Of Samtel Machines And Pr...

Wtax/1003/2022 Of Samtel Machines And Projects Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 05 Aug 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisdb_16012018
Parties
Wtax/1003/2022 Of Samtel Machines And Projects Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
05 Aug 2022
Assessment year(s)
1994-95
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Wtax/1003/2022 Of Samtel Machines And Projects Limited v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.

Decision: Since it is admitted that the refund has already been granted tothe petitioner, therefore, the writ petition is disposed of.However, if the petitioner is aggrieved with non-payment ofinterest, if any, then he may approach the authority concernedfor redressal of his grievances.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1003 of 2022 Petitioner :- Samtel Machines And Projects LimitedRespondent :- Assistant Commissioner Of Income TaxCounsel for Petitioner :- Raghubir Saran AgrawalCounsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mahajan Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J. Heard Shri R.S. Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner andShri Gaurav Mahajan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for therespondents. This writ petition has been filed praying for the followingreliefs:- "(a) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ,order or direction to the respondent(s) to issue refund amounting toRs.4,13,08,399/- due to the petitioner, along with interest, pursuant to theappeal effect order dated 10.05.2022 passed by respondent no.1 undersection 250/154/260A/143(3) of the Act in the case of the petitioner forAssessment Year AY 1994-95, in a time bound manner." Today, learned Senior Standing Counsel states on instructionsof the respondents that the refund has already been granted on29.07.2022 and the amount has been credited to the bankaccount of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner states on instructions thatalthough the refund has been credited to the bank account of thepetitioner but interest has not been granted, which is anarbitrary action of the respondents for which the petitioner shallmove an application before the respondent concerned. Since it is admitted that the refund has already been granted tothe petitioner, therefore, the writ petition is disposed of.However, if the petitioner is aggrieved with non-payment ofinterest, if any, then he may approach the authority concernedfor redressal of his grievances. Order Date :- 5.8.2022SK
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