Allowed

Anil Sood v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC17 Dec 2024CWP/2603/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a refund of tax deducted from his salary that remained unpaid due to the DDO's failure to file quarterly returns. The Court found TDS was deducted but not deposited. It directed the State to deposit the stolen funds in the petitioner's name and grant a refund for bank-deducted amounts without penalty.

What did the court decide?

The State directed to deposit the outstanding TDS amount in the petitioner's name with the Income Tax Authorities; refund of excess tax from bank to be considered; no penalty levied.

Anil Sood Vs State of Hp and Others — Income Tax | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

2024:HHC:15013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

CWP No.2603 of 2023 Decided on: 17.12.2024

¶4

Anil Sood State of H.P. & o	...Petitioner Versus thers ...Respondents
Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tar Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sat Whether approvedfor r	lok Singh Chauhan, Acting Chief Justice yen Vaidya, Judge eporting? No.
For the petitioner:	Mr. Sudhir Thakur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Somesh Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents:	Mr. Sushant Kaprate, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents- State.
	Mr. Neeraj Sharma and Mr.Ishaan Kashyap, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
	Mr. Tara Chand Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.4.

¶5

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Acting Chief Justice (Oral)

¶6

The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following reliefs:

¶7

“I) By issuing writ of mandamus to the respondents no.1 and 2 by directing them to deposit the amount of tax deducted from the salary of the petitioner for the year 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 with respondent No.3 along with interest if any accrued thereupon. II) By issuing writ of mandamus to the respondent no.2 by directing them to refund the amount of tax

¶8

¶9

unauthorizedly deducted by the bank account of the petitioner.”

¶10

On 03.12.2024, this Court passed the following order:

¶11

“Office of the District Attorney(Legal Cell), Government of Himachal Pradesh, Himachal Bhawan, New Delhi, is directed to impart instructions as to whether any amount has been deducted from the petitioner’s salary under the Sub Head “income tax” and how much amount is lying under the Sub Head with the Department”

¶12

3. In compliance to the aforesaid order, the office of the

¶13

District Attorney, H.P. Legal Cell, New Delhi, has placed on record instructions dated 16.12.2024, paras 2 & 7 thereof, which are necessary for adjudication of the instant petition, read as under:

¶14

“2. That in compliance of order dated 03-12-2024 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of H.P, it is submitted that as per Pay Bill Register available in the office of District Attorney (Legal Cell), Govt. of H. P, Himachal Bhawan, New Delhi the following amount has been deducted under the Sub Head Income Tax".

¶15

Sr.No	Financial Year	Assessment	Amount deducted
		Year	under the Sub
			Head “Income
			Tax”
1	2010-2011	2011-2012	Rs.28,712/-
2.	2011-2012	2012-2013	Rs.48,842/-
3.	2012-2013	2013-2014	Rs.35,407/-

¶16

¶17

Copies of Pay Bill Register for above Financial Years are attached herewith as Annexure D1 to D7 for kind perusal. 7. That besides above, this office also clarified regarding depositing of TDS ( Tax Deducted at Source) with Chartered Accountant office by the then DDO on which they have disclosed that due to non filing of Quarterly Statements for above Financial Years same has not to be found to be deposited with Income Tax department.”

¶18

Now that the respondents have acknowledged the fact

¶19

that the amount towards TDS has in fact been deducted by the petitioner himself, being DDO from the salary for the year 201112, 2012-13 & 2013-14 under the Sub Head “Income Tax” but not deposited with the Authorities, we deem it appropriate to direct the State to deposit this amount on his behalf against his PAN number with the Income Tax Authorities. Ordered accordingly.

¶20

In the event of the tax being deposited, respondent No.2 i.e. the Director, Prosecution, shall consider the case of the petitioner for refund of the amount of tax that has been deducted from the Bank account of the petitioner by giving prorata benefit for the tax amount already deposited and refund the excess amount, if any. In the peculiar facts and circumstances, we direct the Income Tax Authorities not to leavy any penalty etc.

¶21

¶22

In view of the above, the petition is accordingly

¶23

disposed of alongwith pending application(s), if any.

¶24

( Tarlok Singh Chauhan ) Acting Chief Justice

¶25

( Satyen Vaidya ) Judge

¶26

December 17, 2024 (vt)

Anil Sood v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Sood v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kapil Thakur Vs Hrtc and Another

State of Hp and Another Vs Sher Singh Alias Niku and Others

Tota Ram Vs State of Hp and Others

Hppcl and Another Vs Raj Kumar and Others

Court on Its Own Motion Vs State of Hp

Budh Ram (Deseased) and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.