GOPAL EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR SANJAY RAMGOPAL TAPARIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 (2)
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court partly allowed the Writ Petition. The Court set aside the order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Court found that while the Petitioner had deposited the Rs. 25,000/-, the ITAT's dismissal based on the deposit being under 'Basic Tax' was not appropriate, especially in light of the Respondent's subsequent submission that the amount could be utilized for the Petitioner's benefit. The Court directed the Petitioner to deposit Rs. 25,000/- in the High Court within 07 days, which would then be transmitted to the Medical Officer, High Court Dispensary, Aurangabad. The appeal before the ITAT (Appeal No. ITA No.1633/PUN/2017 for AY 2008-09) was remitted back to the ITAT "A" Bench at Pune. The Petitioner was directed to appear before the Tribunal on 01.04.2024, and no fresh notice was required. The Tribunal was to proceed with the hearing in accordance with law.
What were the facts?
The Petitioner, Gopal Extrusions Pvt. Ltd., filed a Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad challenging an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT had dismissed the Petitioner's appeal (Appeal No. ITA No.1633/PUN/2017 for AY 2008-09) on 05.12.2022. This dismissal was based on the ITAT's finding that the Petitioner had not complied with a previous High Court order dated 22.02.2022. The earlier order had directed the Petitioner to deposit Rs. 25,000/- with the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Jalgaon, within two weeks, and then appear before the Tribunal for the appeal to be decided on merits. The Petitioner deposited the amount on 03.03.2022, but the ITAT noted it was deposited under the head 'Basic Tax', which it deemed a non-compliance.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the deposit of Rs. 25,000/- under the head 'Basic Tax' constituted non-compliance with the High Court's order dated 22.02.2022, thereby justifying the dismissal of the Petitioner's appeal by the ITAT? Assessee's Contention: The Petitioner argued that they had complied with the High Court's order by depositing the specified amount. The issue of the head under which it was deposited was a procedural technicality. The Petitioner sought the quashing of the ITAT's dismissal order and a remand for a decision on merits. Revenue's Contention: The Respondent/Department initially argued that the deposit under 'Basic Tax' was a non-compliance. However, during the proceedings, the learned Advocate for the Respondent submitted that the amount deposited under 'Basic Tax' could be utilized in favour of the Petitioner in the future. The Respondent further suggested that the Rs. 25,000/- be deposited in the High Court and utilized for a public cause, indicating a concession on the strict interpretation of compliance.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
- 1 - wp2758.24.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 2758 OF 2024 Gopal Extrusions Pvt. Ltd. .. Petitioner versus The Income Tax Officer .. Respondent
Mr. R. R. Chandak, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. Kalpalata Patil Bharaswadkar, Advocate for the Respondent.
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND R. M. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 3rd APRIL, 2024. PER COURT : 1. This is a motion for speaking to the minutes of the order dated 13th March, 2024. 2. It is pointed out that in paragraph No. 5(b) of the order, the number of the Appeal is wrongly typed as 1663 instead of 1633. 3. The error be corrected. Corrected order be uploaded.
( R. M. JOSHI) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE) JUDGE
JUDGE dyb 2024:BHC-AUG:5837-DB This Order is Speaking to Minutes order of order dated //
- 2 - wp2758.24.odt The order dated 13th March, 2024 stands corrected and uploaded in view of the order dated 3rd April, 2024 passed on the motion of Speaking to the Minutes of the Order. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2758 OF 2024 GOPAL EXTRUSIONS PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER … Shri Raviraj R. Chandak, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. Kalpalata Patil Bharaswadkar, Advocate for the sole Respondent. ...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &
R.M. JOSHI, JJ. DATE :- 13th March, 2024 Per Court :- 1. A peculiar issue is raised before this Court. 2. The Petitioner preferred an Income Tax Appeal No.9/2022 before this Court. By order dated 22.02.2022, the appeal was disposed off with the following directions:- “[I] The impugned order is quashed and set aside and the matter is relegated before the Tribunal on condition that the Appellant deposits Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Jalgaon within a period of two (02) weeks from today. [II] The parties shall appear before the Tribunal 16.03.2022. This Order is Speaking to Minutes order of order dated //
- 3 - wp2758.24.odt [III] The Appellant shall produce the receipt of the deposit of costs of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with the Respondent / Sole before the Tribunal. [IV] The Tribunal shall, thereafter, decide the Appeal on it's own merits. [V] As the date of appearance has been given by this Court, it is not necessary for the Tribunal to issue fresh notice to the parties. 9. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of.” 3. The undisputed aspect in this matter is that the Petitioner deposited the said amount of Rs.25,000/- on 03.03.2022. However, in the appeal that was remitted, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal passed an order on 05.12.2022 and recorded in paragraphs 7 and 8 that, as the amount has been deposited under the head “Basic Tax”, there is non- compliance of the order of this Court and, therefore, the appeal of the Petitioner was dismissed. 4. The learned Advocate for the Respondent/ Department submits that now that amount has been deposited under the head “Basic Tax”, the said amount can be utilized in favour of the Petitioner any time in future, as and when the occasion arises. The Department would make a note of the said deposit under the head of Basic Tax and the Petitioner would be given advantage of the deposit of the said amount. The learned This Order is Speaking to Minutes order of order dated //
- 4 - wp2758.24.odt Advocate further suggests that the amount of Rs.25,000/- be deposited in this Court and the same can be utilized for a public cause. The learned advocate for the IT department submits that the cost amount may be utilised as the Court may deem appropriate. 5. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is partly allowed with the following directions:- (a) The Petitioner shall deposit Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) in this Court within 07 days. The Registry shall transmit the said amount to the Medical Officer, High Court Dispensary, Aurangabad. (b) The order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal shall stand set aside and Appeal No.ITA No.1633/PUN/2017/ Assessment Year 2008-09, shall stand remitted to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “A” Bench at Pune. (c) The Petitioner shall appear before the said Tribunal on 01.04.2024 and a notice of hearing need not be issued. Further hearing in the matter to take shape in accordance law. kps ( R.M. JOSHI, J. ) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ) This Order is Speaking to Minutes order of order dated //
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
