Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 120502 (ALL)

BHARAT SEWA SANSTHAN LKO. THRU. ITS HONRARY SECY. DR. JAGESHWAR NATH MISHRA v. U.O.I. THRU. MINISTRY OF FINANCE NEW DELHI THRU. SECY. AND 2 OTHERS

/43/2025 · 2025-01-31

Brij Raj Singh, Rajan Roy

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:6926-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 43 of 2025 Petitioner :- Bharat Sewa Sansthan Lko. Thru. Its Honrary Secy. Dr. Jageshwar Nath Mishra Respondent :- U.O.I. Thru. Ministry Of Finance New Delhi Thru. Secy. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudeep Kumar,Siddhartha Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I., Kushagra Dikshit Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Neerau Chitrauasnhi and Sri Kushagra Dikshit, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 and 3. 2. The petitioner claims that for the assessment year 1995-96 tax liability was imposed upon it but in appeal it was set aside. The Revenue Department came in Second Appeal before the High Court, which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 31.7.2013, a copy of the said judgment is annexed as Annexure-1. 3. In order to claim the effect of the said judgment an application was filed by the petitioner, as certain dues were payable, which had been realized earlier illegally. The application was filed before the opposite party no. 3 way back in 2016 but till date no decision has been taken. Learned counsel for the revenue does not have any instruction in this regard as of now. 4. This is not a matter to be kept pending. Let the opposite party no. 3 get the facts verified as to whether any such application was filed. If so, what decision has been taken. If it has been taken, to communicate it to the petitioner. If it has not been taken, then do the needful keeping in mind the judgment dated 31.7.2013, unless of-course it has been set aside in appeal by Hon'ble The Supreme Court. In either eventuality, this exercise should be completed within two months. If such application is not traceable in the record of the opposite party no. 3 and there is no legal impediment, then a fresh application can be submitted by the petitioner, which shall be considered in accordance with law. 5. The writ petition is accordingly, disposed of. [Brij Raj Singh, J.] [Rajan Roy, J.] Order Date :- 31.1.2025 /Anuj Singh Digitally signed by :- ANUJ PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench