A writ petition regarding tax refunds was disposed of as infructuous because the respondent confirmed that refunds had been processed and interest paid till the date of processing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~11
DTC EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND TRUST ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate. versus
THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) ..... Respondent Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
O R D E R % 12.02.2018
Counsel for the parties state that refunds have been processed and interest has also been paid till the date of processing of refunds.
In view of the aforesaid position, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the writ petition is rendered infructuous.
Recording the said statement, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
CHANDER SHEKHAR, J.
FEBRUARY 12, 2018 MR/NA
DTC Employees Provident Fund Trust
The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)
Sanjiv Khanna
Chander Shekhar
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
