1 CGHC010263672026 2026:CGHC:29864 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 115 of 2026  Shivam Hi-Tech Steels Private Limited Through Director Ketan Gulati S/o Subhash Chandra Gulati Aged About 40 Years,office Address - 22/ C, Heave Industrial Area, Bhilai, Tahsil And District -Durg Pin 490023 Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1. Union Of India Through Secretary, Central Board Of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax , Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Line, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Deputy Commissioner Of Income- Tax -1(1), 32/32 Bungalows, Amdi Nagar HUDCO, Bhilai Distt. Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Monika Singh, Advocate For U.O.I/Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Abhishek Banjare, C.G.C. For Respondents No. 2 & 3 : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Amit Chaudhari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 15.07 .2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “10.1 Call for the records of the Respondents for its kind perusal. 10.2 Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to forthwith grant and release the due refund of Rs. 12,04,041/- as claimed in the ITR SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.07.15 17:05:21 +0530 2 10.3 Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents to pay interest on the aforesaid refund amount and also on the amount of refund granted pursuant to settlement of dispute under VSVS Act in accordance with Section 244A and additional interest under sec. 244A(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 from the date on which such interest became due till the date of actual payment; 10.4 Pass such other or further order(s), direction(s) or relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that for the assessment year 2014-15, the petitioner filed Income Tax return declaring total income Rs. 22,57,640/-, and there was refund of Rs. 12,04,040/- as per return. She would contend that assessment for said year was completed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and total income was assessed at Rs. 4,30,04,810/- and tax demand of Rs. 1,22,84,670/- was raised. She would contend that an application in Form 1 under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV Act) was submitted by the petitioner and tax liability was settled. She would contend that the petitioner is entitled for refund of tax amount to the tune of Rs. 12,04,040/- and in this regard representation was made before the respondent No. 3 on 18.01.2023, but till date it has not been decided. She would contend that a direction may be issued to the respondent No. 3 to decide pending representation expeditiously. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondents would oppose. 4. Heard. 5. Having considered limited prayer made by Ms. Monika Singh, this petition, 3 at this juncture, is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 3 to decide pending representation of the petitioner dated 18.01.2023, preferably within a period of 90 days, strictly in accordance with the law. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petition is hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE $iddhant