MOHAN LIFESPACES LLP AY 2020 21 vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1 THANE AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WP/2150/2026HC BombayHCBM01007433202616 February 2026Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B.P. COLABAWALLA,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE FIRDOSH PHIROZE POONIWALLA3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the petitioner had already filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) challenging the impugned Assessment Order, and this appeal was pending. The revenue's counsel did not dispute this fact. Citing the precedent in Shantilal Prabhudas & Co. vs. Income-tax Officer, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition with specific directions. The Petitioner was directed to pursue its pending appeal before the CIT (Appeals). All contentions challenging the Notice and the 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 for the CIT (Appeals) to decide on merits.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mohan Lifespaces LLP, filed a Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court challenging a Notice dated 14.09.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and an Assessment Order dated 15.03.2025. The assessment year in question is 2020-21. The petitioner sought to quash and set aside these documents and to prohibit the respondents, including the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, from proceeding further with the re-assessment. The petitioner's counsel informed the court that an appeal against the Assessment Order has already been filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and is pending.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned Notice dated 14.09.2023 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the Assessment Order dated 15.03.2025 are legal and proper, and thus liable to be quashed and set aside? (Question of law and mixed fact and law) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned Notice and Assessment Order should be quashed. They relied on the decision in Shantilal Prabhudas & Co. vs. Income-tax Officer [2025] 175 taxmann.com 303 (Bombay), where the High Court directed parties to pursue their pending appeals against assessment orders and kept the orders from being acted upon until the appeal was decided. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, did not dispute the fact that an appeal was pending before the CIT (Appeals) and that it was yet to be decided.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

18-wp-2150-2026.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2150 OF 2026 Mohan Lifespaces LLP .. Petitioner. Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1, Thane & Others .. Respondents Adv. Sham Walve with Adv. Bhavik Chheda, Adv. Tarang Mehta and Adv. Disha Mehta i/b. Sameer Dalal, for the Petitioner. Adv. Ashok Kotangle with Adv. Suresh Kabra, Adv. Smita Thakur, Adv. Kishore Walanju with Adv. Nikhil Kamble, for Respondents-Revenue.

CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ. DATE: FEBRUARY 16, 2026 P. C. 1 The above Writ Petition relates to A.Y. 2020 – 21 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 14.09.2023 issued u/s 148 of the Act (Ex. C) and the Assessment Order dated 15.03.2025 (Ex. N); FEBRUARY 16, 2026 S.R.JOSHI SMITA RAJNIKANT JOSHI SMITA RAJNIKANT JOSHI Date: 2026.02.20 10:20:29 +0530

18-wp-2150-2026.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 14.09.2023 issued u/s 148 of the Act (Ex. C) and the Assessment Order dated 15.03.2025 (Ex. N) 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. 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.

3 Since, it is fairly conceded at the bar that the Appeal is pending, we dispose the above Petition by passing the following order: - FEBRUARY 16, 2026 S.R.JOSHI

18-wp-2150-2026.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. 4 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. 5 The Writ Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 6 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.] FEBRUARY 16, 2026 S.R.JOSHI

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →