Refund writ maintainability despite non-joinder where interdepartmental remittance did not discharge the refunding authority

A refund writ under Article 226 was held maintainable despite non-joinder of the Income-tax Officer, Bombay, because the remittance to that officer was only an interdepartmental adjustment and did not amount to legal discharge of the refund obligation. Since the deceased partner's share in the dissolved firm had not been ascertained, no specific amount could be identified as his asset. On that basis, the officer at Bombay was treated as a garnishee at most, making him a proper party but not a necessary party to the refund proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition for refund was not maintainable for non-joinder of the Income-tax Officer, Bombay, and whether that officer was a necessary party.

Analysis: The amount remitted to the Income-tax Officer, Bombay, was treated only as an interdepartmental adjustment on the assumption that it represented the asset of one deceased partner. The share of that partner in the dissolved firm had not been determined, so no specific portion of the refundable amount could be identified as his asset. In these circumstances, the remittance did not amount to legal discharge of the refund obligation. The officer at Bombay, standing only in the position of a garnishee, was at best a proper party and not a necessary party to the refund proceedings under Article 226.

Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable despite non-joinder of the Income-tax Officer, Bombay, and the objection of non-maintainability was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on the non-joinder point, the Division Bench order was set aside, and the matter was sent back for decision on the remaining objections to refund.

Ratio Decidendi: A person to whom funds are merely remitted by interdepartmental arrangement, without a determined legal entitlement to the amount, is not a necessary party to a refund writ petition; such remittance does not constitute legal discharge of the refunding authority's liability.

---