5 ^^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICAIURE CHHATTISGZ^RH AT BILAgPUR %rit Petttion .^^: C5f 2002 PETITIONER : Smt. Nirmala Rai L/R Late(Shri) B.N. Rai. Aged about-^Z-c years K/O Baldeo Bagh^ Rajnandgaon. RESPONDENTS ^^^^".^ '^^^v\<\'>^G^'^ ^•^t^ ^^- ^ Y E RSU S 1) Unlon of India^ Through Secretary Ministry of Finance^ North BlQok New Delhi » (2) Central Board of Direct Taxes^ New Delhi (3) Commissioner of Income- Tax^ l^ew Central Revenue BuiIding^ Civi1 Llnes , Ralpur(C.G.) (4) Income-Tax Officer, Ward-I ^ Raj nand,gaon (C, G.) PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR A WRIT I.N TFIE NAIURE OF MANDAI'OTS , CERTIORARY ETC< ^.^Jk.^ XI-HC—78 NWW ^W^ 'S^ ^WW^, ^\i\W\^, [®!d!^y ..^.^...^^.2..Q. ^Tf^T'1?^^ ( ^t^<^) ^.n^T-^T f^it^- ^SH" 3TT^T ^*RT^ i^^^-" ^iTW^tt^^T^l 28-2-2005 Srl Shashank Dubey, Seniotj QbS^^^Ff "^TR^Tf ^ ft^ Tf^R^ ^3?1^3??^I ^dvocate wi-rti Sri Neeiabh Dubey, ^dvocate for the petitioner. Sri B,K- Rawat, Senior St^nd^ Counsei for the Zncome Tax Oepartment/r^spondents. Heard. The petitioner has preferrec| the action of respondents No<3 appiication to respondent No.3 and the refund is not being made to Itiej At the out^et, Jeamed couns^I for 1+ie Department ^ubmitted that since the appJication . is aiready ^ending, thsrefors, an^ord&r can be passed 1+aat respondents No.3 <& 4 ^tspulated time and respondents No this Court the Income Tax Authoil thig writ petitjon being aggrieved by and 4, whereby even after making filin9 ^turn before re^pondent No.4, Ipetitioner. should decide the appSication within a 3 & 4 will decide the same. On the other hand, iearne^l Senior Counsei for the petitioner submitted that in simiiar cases, ths^ Court pas^d 1+ie order, but jnsplte of -tihe time iimit 9iven by this Cour^ the Income Tax Authoritses are not passing any order, Thls is a seriout matter, When The time is fixed by ities are bound to pa^s order within such a period and if -rtiey have ^rsy difficuity in that case they ean request the Court for extension of ({-jme. lif i TiF' aju.aa.aj^^ :w%^^®teBtoffi^a^^:B»»W^ ^"^ '^TPTT^T^, ^ft^TH^, f^TRT^ ..(^.A.. ^S^T^^ (^i^^l) ^li^Wl^te ^T^lt^Tt»'^W ^ ^-.^ m ^oma i^t?w ^ficT w^r - 2. Havin9 heard tearned couns^i the submission made by ieamed pfetition is dssposed of with a d$t ^houid decide the appiication of t^ of three months from today. Ih within the stipuiated time, then ti^e thls Court for appropriate action, Consequent!y, I.A.No.4034/^003 Parties are entitted for cert{ wsita^N ^i^i ^ 'fet^t ^N^R iTsftffl'am^i for the partie^ ond havina r^ard to soun^l for th@ r-espondents, the writ rection that respondents No,3 and 4 e petitioner for refund within a period case, the appiication is not decided petitioner wiii be at iibert^ to move stands dispo^^d of. fied copy of this order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge