HARI MULCHAND BHATIA AY 2018 19 vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Thane

PDF · subscribers
WP/3762/2026HC BombayHCBM01013932202625 March 2026Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B.P. COLABAWALLA,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE FIRDOSH PHIROZE POONIWALLA4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the Writ Petition by directing the Petitioner to pursue the appeal already filed before the CIT Appeals against both the Notice under Section 148 and the Assessment Order. All contentions challenging the impugned Notice and Assessment Order, including those raised in the Writ Petition, were kept open to be agitated before the CIT Appeals. The Court further directed that the impugned Assessment Order shall not be acted upon until the appeal is decided by the CIT Appeals. The Court clarified that all contentions of all parties are expressly kept open to be decided by the CIT Appeals on its own merits and in accordance with law. No specific finding was given on the merits of the challenge to the Notice or the Assessment Order, as the matter was remitted to the appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The Petitioner, Hari Mulchand Bhatia, filed a Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court challenging a Notice dated March 20, 2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and an Assessment Order dated February 27, 2025. These actions pertain to Assessment Year 2018-19. The Petitioner sought to quash these orders and prevent the Revenue from proceeding further with reassessment. The Petitioner's counsel informed the Court that an appeal against the Assessment Order has already been filed and is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ('CIT Appeals'). The Revenue's counsel did not dispute this fact.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a Writ Petition challenging a Notice under Section 148 and an Assessment Order when an appeal against the Assessment Order is pending before the CIT Appeals, and if so, what directions should be issued. (Question of law and mixed fact and law, concerning the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 and the procedural remedies available under the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The Petitioner relied on the Bombay High Court's decision in Shantilal Prabhudas & Co. vs. Income-tax Officer, which directed parties to pursue their pending appeals against assessment orders and kept contentions open until the appeal is decided, while preventing action on the impugned order until then. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue did not dispute the pendency of the appeal before the CIT Appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
9 wp3762-26.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3762 OF 2026 Hari Mulchand Bhatia …Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle – 1, Thane & Ors. …Respondents Mr. Sham V. Walve a/w Mr.Sameer Dalal a/w Mr.Bhavik Chheda a/w Mr.Tarang Mehta, Advocates for the Petitioner. Mr.Ashok Kotangle a/w Mr.Unnayan G.Dhale a/w Mr.Suresh Kabra a/w Mr.Pravin Parghane, Advocates for the Respondents. CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ. DATE: MARCH 25, 2026 P. C. 1. The above Writ Petition relates to A.Y. 2018 – 19 and is filed seeking the following reliefs: “a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for all records of the Petitioner’s case and after going into the legality and propriety thereof, to quash and set aside the Impugned Notice dated 20.03.2024 issued u/s 148 of the Act (Ex. C) and the Assessment Order dated 27.02.2025 (Ex. M); Page 1 of 4 MARCH 25, 2026 Mohite TRUSHA TUSHAR MOHITE Digitally signed by TRUSHA TUSHAR MOHITE Date: 2026.03.26 16:58:29 +0530 9 wp3762-26.doc b) Issue a Writ of Prohibition or any other appropriate Writ, Order, Direction in nature of Prohibition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordering the Respondents herein to permanently refrain from giving effect to and/or proceeding further by way of re-assessment or otherwise in any manner in respect of the Impugned Notice dated 20.03.2024 issued u/s 148 of the Act (Ex. C) and the Assessment Order dated 27.02.2025 (Ex. M) and any consequential action thereof;” 2. Mr. Walve, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, fairly pointed out that the Petitioner has filed an Appeal challenging the impugned Assessment Order, which is pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘CIT Appeals’). He relies on the decision of this Court in Shantilal Prabhudas & Co. vs. Income-tax Officer [2025] 175 taxmann.com 303 (Bombay) wherein under similar circumstances, this Court had directed the parties to pursue its Appeal already filed against the impugned Assessment Order and expressly kept open all contentions while observing that, until the Appeal is decided, the impugned Assessment Order would not be acted upon. 3. Mr. Kotangle, the learned counsel for the Respondents, does not dispute the said position and the fact that the Appeal is yet to be decided. 4. Since, it is fairly conceded at the bar that the Appeal is pending, we dispose the above Petition by passing the following order: - Page 2 of 4 MARCH 25, 2026 Mohite 9 wp3762-26.doc (a) The Petitioner shall pursue its Appeal already filed before the CIT Appeals against the impugned Notice issued under Section 148, as

well as the impugned Assessment Order. (b) All contentions challenging the impugned Notice and the Assessment Order, on all grounds available to the Petitioner, including the ones raised in the present Writ Petition, are kept open to be agitated before the CIT Appeals.

(c) Until the Appeal before CIT Appeals is decided, the impugned Assessment Order shall not be acted upon.

5.

It is once again clarified that all contentions of all parties are expressly kept open to be agitated before the CIT Appeals and which shall be decided by the CIT Appeals on its own merits and in accordance with law.

6.

The Writ Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs. MARCH 25, 2026 Mohite

9 wp3762-26.doc

7.

This order will be Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order. [FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.] MARCH 25, 2026 Mohite

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →