SMT.KRISHNA SHARMA V. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T

CWJC/9991/2008

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Krishna Sharma, who filed a writ petition against the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and others, concerning the non-consideration of her refund claim for excess tax paid in the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97. The petitioner had initially filed for a refund in 1999, which was not processed due to a delay in filing the claim, attributed to her parent's illness. The Income Tax Officer later requested additional documents to process the claim, which the petitioner provided. After considerable delay, the court was assured by the revenue's counsel that the refund would be processed within two months, leading to the disposal of the petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2008] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 726394 (HC-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 12-11-2008
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: S K SHARAN
• Assessee Lawyers: SURESH GIRI; ANURAJ SHARMA
• Keywords: Delay in filing; Excess tax paid; Income Tax; Refund claim
• Section: 139(1); 237; 237; 194D

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9991 of 2008 SMT.KRISHNA SHARMA Versus CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ORS. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Suresh Chandra Giri, Mr. Anuraj Sharma, Advocates For the respondents : Mr. S.K.Sharan, Advocate --- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice And Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal --- Dated, the 12th November, 2008 We heard the counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner’s grievance relates to non-consideration of refund claim made by her way back in the year 1999 for the excess tax paid for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97. 3. We do not deem it necessary to go into history of refund claim but it will be suffice to refer to the application dated 13th June, 2003 made to the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna for condonation of delay in filing refund claim in response to circular no.670 dated 26th October, 1993 and for issuance of refund voucher. 4. The application dated 13th June, 2003 reads thus: “Before: The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Central Revenue Building Vir Chand Patel Road, Patna Through: The Income Tax Officer, Ward Saharsa Re: SMT. KRISHN SHARMA W/O Prof. Braj Monan Sharma 2 Near Meer Talkies,SAHARSA PAN; AHPS 1018E Sub: Application for condoning delay in Filing Refund Claim in response to circular No.670 Dt/20.10.93, Request Regarding. Sir, Respectfully I have to state as under: That due to illness of my old aged parent I could not file my return of Income for the financial year 1994-1995 & 1995 - 1996 pertaining to A – year 1995-1996 & 1996-1997 within stipulated time U/S 139)1) of the I.T.Act. I have filed my return of income claiming refund U/S 237 Out of TDS U/S 194 D [On LIC commission] for both the Assessment year as under: A-Year 1995 -1996 A-Year 1996-10997 Total Income 56650.00 63580.00 TDS U/S 194D 15366.00 19970.00 Refund Claimed 14162.00 18450.00 Return Receipts No. 18915 18914 Date of Return Filing 31.03.1999 31.03.1999 As per detail given herein above total refund claim for both year is Rs.14162.00 and 18450.00 respectively total Rs.32612.00. I have to clarify in this regard that both the above mentioned return is not comensentry in nature. I therefore request your honour to please be kind enough to issue the refund voucher against my claim for refund in both years by invoking provisions as per circular No.670 Dt. 26.10.1993 and oblige. Till now I have not received any refund in this regard. Yours faithfully Sd/ [Smt. Krishna Sharina]” 5. It transpires that after a gap of five years, the Income Tax Officer Ward -1 Saharsa asked the petitioner to furnish the documents referred to in the communication dated 26th August, 2008 including the indemnity bond. 6. The communication dated 26th August, 2008 reads thus: “GOVERNMENT OF INDIA OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, 3 SAHARSA No. Belated Refund/Ward-1/KS/08-09/628 dated, Saharsa, the 26th August, 2008 Urgent/Speed Post Smt. Krishna Sharma, w/o Sri Braj Mohan Sharma, Flat No.46, Regency Gardens, Road No.1F, New Patliputra Colony, P.S. Patliputra, Distt. Patna (Bihar) Madam, Sub: Claim of Refund for Asstt. Yrs. 1995-96 and 1996-97 – Reg Please refer to your claim of refunds for asstt. Yrs. 1995-96 and 1996-97. In this connection you are requested to furnish the following: a) Original receipt for the Returns filed for these years. b) Copy of TDS certificates (Form 16A) for these years and other documents (e.g. LIC receipts etc) c) The circumstances that prevented to furnish the Returns within the time specified u/s 139 (1) or 139(4) of the I.T. Act. d) Indemnity Bond, as under: e) Copy of bank account since 01.04.1999 to date Your are further requested to comply with the above at the earliest so that the claim of refunds may be processed accordingly. Yours faithfully Sd/ (Mohan Prasad) Income tax Officer, Ward -1 , Saharsa INDEMNITY BOND I hereby undertake to indemnify the President of India against any loss that may be caused by granting refund on the original of the following dividend warrants/certificate No. of Warrant/ Date Name of Nature of Amount Amount of Certificates deductor payment TDS . 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. I also certify that I have neither claimed nor obtained refund of tax now will claim nor obtain refund of tax on the original vouchers relating to the above dividend warrants/Certificates. Signature of the Refundee” 4 7. In response to the communication dated 26th August, 2008, the petitioner has submitted the original receipt for returns for the assessment years 1995-96 & 1996 -97, photocopy of the duplicate returns of the aforesaid years, photocopy of TDS Certificates, indemnity bond and the copy of the circular no.670 dated 26.10.1993 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. 8. There has been considerable delay in dealing with the petitioner’s refund claim. The counsel for the revenue assures us that within a period of two months now, an appropriate order for refund would be passed by the concerned authority and refund voucher would be issued. 9. In the light of the statement made by the counsel for the revenue, which we accept, we are satisfied that further direction by us in this regard is not necessary. 10. Needless to say that the concerned revenue authority shall appreciate the anxiety on the part of the petitioner in having the refund claim settled at the earliest. We observe that an appropriate order shall be passed as early as possible and in no case later than two months from today, for which an assurance has been given by the respondents’ counsel. 11. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. R .M. Lodha, CJ. Kishore K. Mandal, J. Neyaz/- "