, J.

1. Income-tax assessment of the petitioner, Messrs. Suri Sons, Jalandhar, for the assessment year 1979-80 was completed on August 14, 1982. Eventually, the said assessment was annulled by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, vide its order dated July 31, 1985. The Department has taken steps to question the validity of the order annulling the assessment by means of a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, which proceedings are pending before the High Court. As a result of the annulment of the assessment, the petitioner became entitled to the refund of the tax deposited by it for the assessment year 1979-80.

2. When, despite the petitioners claim made on January 29, 1986, the assessing authority did not take steps to refund the amount of the tax deposited by the petitioner, the petitioner has approached this court for relief under article 226 of the Constitution.

3. This petition has been heard by us along with Writ Petition No. 4378 of 1986 (Leader Valves Private Ltd. v. CIT [1987] 167 ITR 542). Even though no return has been filed by the respondents, Shri Ashok Bhan, learned counsel appearing on their behalf, has stated before us that in this case too, the assessing authority has withheld the refund in exercise of its powers under Section 241 of the Income-tax Act merely for the reason that the proceedings questioning the validity of the order directing refund are pending before the High Court.

4. As held by us in our judgment in Civil Writ Petition No. 4378 of 1986 (Leader Valves Private Ltd. v. CIT [1987] 167 ITR 542), the assessing authority is not justified in withholding the refund which has become due to the assessee merely for the reason that the proceedings initiated by the Revenue questioning the validity of the order under which the refund has become due are pending before the appropriate authority. Accordingly, for the reasons given by us in our judgment in Writ Petition No. 4378 of 1986 (Leader Valves Private Ltd. v. CIT[1987] 167 ITR 542), the petition succeeds and is allowed. The respondents are directed not to withhold the refund which has become due to the petitioner as a result of the annulment of its assessment for the year 1979-80 on the ground that the proceedings questioning the validity of the order annulling the assessment are pending before the High Court.