Priyanka Vig V. The Director of Income Tax, Centralized Processing

CWP/21252/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Priyanka Vig, the petitioner, who filed a writ petition against the Director of Income Tax, Centralized Processing, seeking a refund of income tax amounting to Rs.1,31,940 for the assessment year 2020-2021. Initially, the refund was not credited due to invalid bank account details provided by the petitioner, which was communicated to her on several occasions. However, the refund was eventually processed and credited to her account before the court's decision, rendering the petition infructuous.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 679548 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: URVASHI DHUGGA
• Assessee Lawyers: BHUPINDER KAUR
• Keywords: Assessment year 2020-2021; Bank account details; Income Tax Refund; Credit of refund failed

Judgement Text

"262 Priyanka Vig The Director of Income Tax, Centralized Processing CORAM: Present: LISA GILL 1. refund income tax amount of Rs.1,31,940/ assessment year 2020 2. statement dated 25.1 Rs.1,31,940/ and has been credited to petitioner’s Bank account on 02.11.2024. It is submitted that credit of refund had failed on 20.02.2021 28.05.2022. It details. This intimation had been provided to petitioner. 3. amount in question has been refunded to peti learned counsel for petitioner. 4. is disposed of January 20 manju Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Priyanka Vig Versus The Director of Income Tax, Centralized Processing HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN **** Ms. Bhupinder Kaur, Advocate for the Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent. **** LISA GILL, J. (Oral) Prayer in this writ petition is for refund income tax amount of Rs.1,31,940/ assessment year 2020-2021. Learned counsel for respondent while referring to written statement dated 25.11.2024 on behalf of respondent submits that sum of Rs.1,31,940/- for the assessment year 2020 and has been credited to petitioner’s Bank account on 02.11.2024. It is submitted that credit of refund had failed on 20.02.2021 . It transpired that this was on account of invalid Bank account details. This intimation had been provided to petitioner. Be that as it may, the position remains that as of now the amount in question has been refunded to peti learned counsel for petitioner. In view thereof, this writ petition disposed of accordingly. 20, 2025. Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21252-2024 Date of Decision:-20.01.2025 ……Petitioner The Director of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Centre and Anr. ……Respondents LISA GILL ALOK JAIN , Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel is for directing respondents to refund income tax amount of Rs.1,31,940/- along with interest for the Learned counsel for respondent while referring to written 1.2024 on behalf of respondent submits that sum of for the assessment year 2020-2021 has since been refunded and has been credited to petitioner’s Bank account on 02.11.2024. It is submitted that credit of refund had failed on 20.02.2021, 24.12.2021 and transpired that this was on account of invalid Bank account details. This intimation had been provided to petitioner. Be that as it may, the position remains that as of now the amount in question has been refunded to petitioner. This is so accepted by this writ petition is rendered infructuous and (LISA GILL) JUDGE (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE 2024 .01.2025 Petitioner s directing respondents to along with interest for the Learned counsel for respondent while referring to written 1.2024 on behalf of respondent submits that sum of 2021 has since been refunded and has been credited to petitioner’s Bank account on 02.11.2024. It is 4.12.2021 and transpired that this was on account of invalid Bank account Be that as it may, the position remains that as of now the tioner. This is so accepted by and Manju 2025.01.22 10:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document "