SOURABH PODDAR V. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRR BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA FINANCE DEPARTMENT AND ORS

WPC/1646/2014

AI Insights

This case involves multiple writ petitions filed by various petitioners against the Union of India and other respondents concerning issues related to the Income Tax Department. The petitions were consolidated under the jurisdiction of the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi. The petitioners sought relief on grounds that were not specified in the provided document. However, during the proceedings, the learned counsels for the petitioners requested permission to withdraw these applications, indicating an intention to possibly refile or appeal under different circumstances or legal grounds. The court granted this request, allowing the withdrawal and advising the petitioners on the possibility of appealing, subject to the law of limitation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 769999 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2019
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAJIV SINHA
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMEET GADODIA
• Keywords: Law of limitation; Remedy of appeal; Withdrawal of applications

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (T) No. 1353 of 2014 Nitin Kumar Saraf (HUF) …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs, New Delhi 2. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralized Process Cell-TDS, Ghaziabad, U.P. 3. Chairman, Central Board of Director Taxes, New Delhi. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 1210 of 2015 M/s. Satyanarayan Sitaram, A proprietorship concern, Ranchi. …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Director Taxes, through its Chairman, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 4. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 1541 of 2014 Subhash Chandra Jain …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs, New Delhi. 2. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralized Process Cell-TDS, Ghaziabad, U.P. 3. Chairman, Central Board of Director Taxes, New Delhi. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 1639 of 2014 Sourabh Poddar …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Finance Department, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali Ghaziabad, U.P. 2 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 1641 of 2014 Manohar Kumar Drolia @ Manohar Drolia …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Finance Department, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 1646 of 2014 Sourabh Poddar …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Finance Department, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 1651 of 2014 With I.A. No. 1965 of 2014 -------- Sourabh Poddar …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Finance Department, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents 3 With W.P. (T) No. 1667 of 2014 Karan Khandelwal …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Finance Department, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 1737 of 2014 Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board, Ranchi.. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Finance Department, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 1744 of 2014 Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board, Ranchi.. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Finance Department, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With 4 W.P. (T) No. 1759 of 2014 Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board, Ranchi.. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Finance Department, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 1760 of 2014 Jharkhand State Agricultural Marketing Board, Ranchi.. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India, represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Finance Department, New Delhi. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. 4. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 2219 of 2014 Mahabir Kumar Mantri . …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India. 2. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax TDS-CPC, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 5. Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi. … …. …. Respondents With W.P. (T) No. 2757 of 2014 Shree Balaji Steel Works, Jamshedpur. …. …. Petitioner Versus 5 1. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi. 2. The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. 3. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Ranchi. 5. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum. 6. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Cell, TDS, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. …. …. Respondents ------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ------- For the Petitioners : M/s. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate For the Respondents : M/s. Rajiv Sinha, ASGI ------- 21/ 10.12.2019. Learned counsels for the petitioners in all these matters seek permission to withdraw these applications with the liberty to avail the remedy of appeal. All these applications are accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty to avail the remedy of appeal, if available, and subject to the law of limitation, in accordance with law. The pending Interlocutory Application stands dismissed. (H.C. Mishra, J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.) D.S./B.S. "