JASWINDER SINGH LOTA v. DCIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) AND OTHERS
CWP/11930/2025 · 2025-04-30
Deepak Sibal, Lapita Banerji
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 51513 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 51513 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(Sr. No.123)
CWP No. 11930 of 2025
Date of decision: 30.04.2025
Jaswinder Singh Lota ..... Petitioner
Versus
DCIT (International Taxation) and others
..... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Present : Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate and
Mr. Prakyat JS, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel
for the respondent(s)-Income Tax Department.
* * *
DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) (1)
Through this petition the petitioner seeks issuance of directions to the respondent Income Tax authorities to refund him an amount of Rs.15,33,850/- which amount, according to him, has been illegally adjusted by the respondents. (2)
At the outset, Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, who appears on advance notice for the respondents, states that she has express instructions from the respondents that through order dated 25.04.2025 passed by the DCIT (International Taxation), the rectification sought by the petitioner has already been made and resultantly, an amount of Rs.15,34,890/- has been transferred online to CPC, Bengaluru, which authority, subject to the providing of required documentation by the petitioner, within 03 weeks from today, shall credit the afore amount in the petitioner’s bank account.
SUNIL YADAV 2025.05.07 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh
CWP No. 11930 of 2025 [2]
(3)
In the light of the afore statement of Ms. Dhugga, no further orders are required to be passed in the present petition and the same is accordingly disposed of. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to represent to the respondent Income Tax authorities in case according to him there is any discrepancy with regard to the amount which is actually refunded to him by the respondent authorities.
(DEEPAK SIBAL)
JUDGE
30.04.2025
( LAPITA BANERJI ) sunil yadav
JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No
Whether reportable : Yes / No SUNIL YADAV 2025.05.07 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh