CRYSTAL CERAMIC INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1(1)(1)

PDF · subscribers
SCA/17592/2021HC GujaratGJHC24063099202130 November 2021Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal noted that the learned senior advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Tushar Hemani, assisted by Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh, argued the matter for some time. Subsequently, the petitioner chose to withdraw the Special Civil Application. The Court explicitly stated that it had not entered into the merits of the matter. The withdrawal of the petition was accepted, and the matter was disposed of as withdrawn. The Court also clarified that this withdrawal would not preclude the petitioner from pursuing other legal recourses available under the law. No specific finding on the merits of the reassessment notice was made.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Crystal Ceramic Industries Private Limited, filed a Special Civil Application before the Gujarat High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition challenged a notice dated 30.03.2021 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(1), under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. This notice sought to reopen the income tax assessment for the assessment year 2016-17. The petitioner sought to quash the notice, stay further proceedings, and grant other appropriate relief.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 30.03.2021 issued by the respondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, seeking to reopen the assessment for AY 2016-17, is valid and should be set aside. The petitioner's contention, as argued by learned senior advocate Mr. Tushar Hemani, was to challenge this notice. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the revenue regarding the validity of the notice. The issue is framed as a question of law concerning the validity of the reassessment notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

C/SCA/17592/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/11/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17592 of 2021 ========================================================== CRYSTAL CERAMIC INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1(1)(1) ========================================================== Appearance: MR TUSHAR HEMANI with MS VAIBHAVI K PARIKH(3238) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE

Date : 30/11/2021

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI) 1. The petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has approached this Court challenging the notice dated 30.03.2021 issued by the respondent under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act seeking to reopen the income tax assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year 2016-17 with the following prayers: - “(a) quash and set aside the impugned notice at ANNEXURE “A” to this petition; (b) pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, to stay the implementation and operation of the notice at ANNEXURE “A” to this petition and stay further proceedings for the Assessment Year 2016-17; (c) any other and further relief deemed just and proper be granted in the interest of justice; Page 1 of 2

C/SCA/17592/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/11/2021 (d) to provide for the cost of this petition.” 2. We have heard learned senior advocate Mr. Tushar Hemani assisted by learned advocate Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh appearing for the petitioner, who after arguing for some time, have chosen to withdraw the matter. 3. Present petition stands disposed of as withdrawn. We have not entered into the merits of the matter. The withdrawal of this matter shall not come in the way of the petitioner in taking other legal recourse available under the law. (SONIA GOKANI, J) (NISHA M. THAKORE,J) Bhoomi Page 2 of 2

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →