SHANKAR GOVIND MHATRE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2) AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WP/584/2023HC BombayHCBM01054830202203 April 2024Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE K.R. SHRIRAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court quashed and set aside the impugned orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act. The Court also set aside any consequential notices or orders. This decision was based on the agreement between the petitioner and the revenue that the issue was covered by the recent judgment of the High Court in Godrej Industries Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The Court explicitly stated that the petition was disposed of only on the issue of limitation, as implied by the reference to the Godrej Industries judgment. The petitioner was granted liberty to raise other contentions independently if the need arose in other matters. The ratio decidendi is that if a matter is covered by a binding precedent of the same court, the authorities should follow it, and the court will quash proceedings that do not adhere to it.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shankar Govind Mhatre, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging orders passed under Section 148A(d) and notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer Ward 3(2) and others. The petitioner contended that the issues in the petition were covered by a recent judgment of the same Court in Godrej Industries Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The revenue's counsel agreed with this submission. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned orders passed under Section 148A(d) and notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are liable to be quashed and set aside in light of the judgment in Godrej Industries Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the present case is covered by the recent judgment of the Bombay High Court in Godrej Industries Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, implying that the impugned orders and notices should be set aside based on the principles laid down in that decision. Revenue's Contention: The revenue's counsel agreed with the petitioner's submission that the issue is covered by the aforementioned judgment, indicating no opposition to the petitioner's stance on this point.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1/2 901-aswp-584-2023.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.584 OF 2023 Shankar Govind Mhatre …Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer Ward 3(2) and Ors. …Respondents Mr. Dharan Gandhi for Petitioner. Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for Respondents-Revenue. CORAM: K. R. SHRIRAM & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATED: 3rd April, 2024 PC:-

1.

Counsel for Petitioner states that the issue in this petition will be covered by the recent judgment of this Court in Godrej Industries Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai and Ors.1 Counsel for Respondents agrees.

2.

Therefore, impugned orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act in the petition are hereby quashed and set aside. Consequential notices or orders, if any, also stand quashed and set aside. 3 Petition disposed. 4 Since we have disposed this petition only on the issue of 1 Writ Petition No.450 of 2023 dtd. 28th February 2024. Shivgan SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN Date: 2024.04.04 15:18:54 +0530

2/2 901-aswp-584-2023.doc limitation, petitioner may raise the other contentions raised in this petition independently, if the need arise in other matters. (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (K. R. SHRIRAM, J.) Shivgan

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →