Bombay High Court
ROHINI ANIL PANDHEversusTHE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The notices, demand notices, penalty notices and re‑assessment orders impugned in the petitions are quashed and set aside.
Summary
A series of writ petitions filed by various taxpayers challenged income‑tax notices, demand notices, penalty notices and re‑assessment orders for different assessment years. The petitioners argued that the orders were illegal and sought their quashing. The Court observed that the matters fall within the scope of the recent decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2024 SCC OnLine 1249), which set a precedent for invalidating similar tax orders. Applying that precedent, the Court held that the impugned notices and orders, including any subsequent re‑assessment orders, must be quashed and set aside. Consequently, all the petitions were disposed of, with the Court leaving open any other contentions not covered by the Hexaware judgment for future consideration.
Issues considered
- The validity of income‑tax notices, demand notices, penalty notices and re‑assessment orders issued to the petitioners
- Whether the principles laid down in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax apply to the present petitions
Subjects
- Income Tax
- Writ Petition
- Quashing of notices
- Re‑assessment
- Hexaware precedent
- Tax law
- Judicial review
Judgment
1/4 914-WP-1166-2023 & Ors.doc
Digitally
signed by
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
PURTI
PURTI PRASAD
PRASAD PARAB
PARAB Date:
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
2024.05.13
13:52:11
+0530
(914) WRIT PETITION NO. 1166 OF 2023
Rupani Intercom Pvt. Ltd. ...Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer Ward-14(3)(1),
Mumbai & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
(917) WRIT PETITION NO. 3581 OF 2022
Kishin Shewaram Loungani ...Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer Ward-23(2)(6),
Mumbai & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
(918) WRIT PETITION NO. 256 OF 2023
Celestial Aviation Funding Unlimited
Company ...Petitioner
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,
International Tax, Circle 2(3)(2) & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
(919) WRIT PETITION NO. 2189 OF 2023
Sodexo India Service Private Limited ...Petitioner
Versus
ACIT, Mumbai & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
(920) WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 5792 OF 2023
Indira Suresh Agrawal ...Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer, Ward12(2)(1) & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
(929) WRIT PETITION NO. 71 OF 2024
Roche Products (India) Private Limited ...Petitioner
Purti Parab
2/4 914-WP-1166-2023 & Ors.doc
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
International Tax, Circle 1(3)(1),
Mumbai & Anr. ...Respondents
AND
(932) WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 5981 OF 2024
Saira Banu Khan ...Petitioner
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Central Circle 4(1) & Ors. ...Respondents
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
(922) WRIT PETITION NO. 6452 OF 2023
Kishore Haresh Ramchandan ...Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer Ward 2(2) & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
(926) WRIT PETITION NO. 15251 OF 2023
Rohini Anil Pandhe ...Petitioner
Versus
the Assistant Commissioner of
Income Tax & Anr. ...Respondents
----
WP/1166/2023
Ms. Dinkle Hariya, Advocate for Petitioner.
Ms. Swapna Gokhale for Respondents-Revenue.
WP/3581/2022
Mr. Jas Sanghavi and Mr. Yash Prakash and Ms Vikas Poojary i/b PDS Legal
for the Petitioner.
Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for Respondents-Revenue.
WP/256/2023
Ms. Fereshte Sethna and Mr. Mrunal Parekh i/b DMD Advocates for
Petitioner.
Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondents.
Purti Parab
3/4 914-WP-1166-2023 & Ors.doc
WP/2189/2023
Mr. Mrunal Parekh i/b DMD Advocates for Petitioner.
Mr. Devvrat Singh for Respondents-Revenue.
WPL/5792/2023
Ms. Anjali Trivedi i/b V Thakers Advocates for Petitioner.
Mr. Subir Kumar a/w Mr. Abhinav Palsikar for Respondents-Revenue.
WP/6452/2023
Mr. Dharan Gandhi for Petitioner.
Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for Respondents-Revenue.
WP/15251/2023
Ms. Dinkle Hariya i/b Ms. Rashmi Vyas for Petitioner.
Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for Respondents-Revenue.
WP/71/2024
Ms. Fereshte Sethna a/w Mr. Mrunal Parekh i/b DMD Advocates for
Petitioner
Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondents.
WPL/5981/2024
Mr. Dharan V. Gandhi for Petitioner.
Mr. N. C. Ranganayakulu for Respondents-Revenue.
----
CORAM : K. R. SHRIRAM &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATED : 10th MAY 2024
P.C. :
1 All these petitions relate to different Assessment Years. We are
informed by counsel for Petitioners that these Petitions will be covered by
the judgment of this court in Hexaware Technologies Limited v. Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 15(1)(2) Mumbai and Ors .1 Counsel for
Respondents concur.
1 2024 SCC OnLine 1249
Purti Parab
4/4 914-WP-1166-2023 & Ors.doc
3 Therefore, the notices and orders impugned in these petitions are
quashed and set aside. In case any re-assessment orders are passed, the
same also will stand quashed. So also, consequential demand notices or
penalty notices will also stand quashed and set aside.
4 Petitions disposed accordingly.
5. Whichever contention raised in the Petitions not covered by the
Hexaware Technologies (Supra) is kept open to be raised, should the need
arise.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (K. R. SHRIRAM, J.)
Purti Parab
Checking your session…