SHANTILAL MOTILAL KOTHARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
WP/5916/2023HC BombayHCBM01020183202320 January 2026Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B.P. COLABAWALLA,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE FIRDOSH PHIROZE POONIWALLA2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the Revenue had submitted a letter dated July 16, 2025, which was taken on record. Upon perusing this letter, the Court found that the re-assessment proceedings had indeed been dropped. Consequently, the Court held that nothing further survived in the Writ Petition. The Court reasoned that since the primary action being challenged (the re-assessment proceedings) had been withdrawn by the Revenue, the petition had become infructuous. The Court did not delve into the second issue regarding the limit of escaped income as the matter was disposed of on the grounds of infructuousness. The operative direction was to dispose of the Writ Petition as being rendered infructuous.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Late Shantilal Motilal Kothari (through his Legal Representative Mr. Surendra S. Kothari), filed a Writ Petition challenging an order dated July 26, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a notice dated July 28, 2022, issued under Section 148 of the Act. Subsequent notices under Section 142 were also challenged. The assessment year in question was 2017-18. The Revenue contended that the Writ Petition had become infructuous because the re-assessment proceedings initiated against the deceased assessee had been dropped. Furthermore, the Revenue argued that re-opening proceedings in the hands of the legal heir could not be initiated as the information received for the Assessment Year 2017-18 amounted to Rs. 10,00,000, which was below the threshold for escaped income for re-opening.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Writ Petition has become infructuous in light of the Revenue's submission that re-assessment proceedings have been dropped. 2. Whether re-opening proceedings can be initiated against the legal heir when the alleged escaped income for the Assessment Year 2017-18 is Rs. 10,00,000, which is below the applicable limit for re-opening. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner sought to quash the impugned order and notice initiating re-assessment proceedings. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue submitted that the Writ Petition had become infructuous as the re-assessment proceedings against the deceased assessee for AY 2017-18 were dropped. The Revenue also contended that re-opening proceedings against the legal heir were not sustainable as the escaped income of Rs. 10,00,000 was below the limit for re-opening.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 142

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

3-wp-5916-2023.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5916 OF 2023 Late Shantial Motilal Kothari (since deceased) through LR Mr. Surendra S. Kothari .. Petitioner. Versus Income Tax Officer Ward 5(1), Pune & Others .. Respondents Mr. Dhruva Gandhi with Adv. Khushbu Chhajed and Adv. Khushbu Trivedi, Advocates for the Petitioner. Mr. Vikas Khanchandani, Advocate the Respondents-Revenue.

CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ. DATE: JANUARY 20, 2026 P. C. 1 The above Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash and set aside the impugned Order dated 26th July, 2022 passed under Section 148A (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the impugned Notice dated 28 th July, 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act. Subsequent notices issued under Section 142 of the Act have also been impugned in the present Writ Petition. 2 The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent- Revenue submitted that nothing survives in the above Writ Petition in light of Page 1 of 2 JANUARY 20, 2026 S.R.JOSHI SMITA RAJNIKANT JOSHI Digitally signed by SMITA RAJNIKANT JOSHI Date: 2026.01.21 11:30:56 +0530

3-wp-5916-2023.doc

the fact that the re-assessment proceedings initiated against the late Shantilal Motilal Kothari, for the Assessment Year 2017-18, have been dropped. He submitted that, further, the re-opening proceedings in the hands of the legal heir, Shri Surendra S. Kothari, cannot be initiated as the information received in the case of the late Shantilal Motilal Kothari, for Assessment Year 2017-18, amounts to Rs.10,00,000/-, which is less than the limit of escaped income for re-opening of assessment. In this regard, the learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue has tendered a letter dated 16th July, 2025 which is taken on record and marked “X” for identification. A copy of the said letter has also been given to the Advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. 3 On perusing the aforesaid letter, we indeed find that, in the light of what is stated therein, nothing survives in the above Writ Petition. It is clear from the said letter that the re-assessment proceedings have in fact been dropped. We, accordingly, dispose of the above Writ Petition as being rendered infructuous. 4 This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ 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.] Page 2 of 2 JANUARY 20, 2026 S.R.JOSHI

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →