PRACHI KSHITIJ THAKUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 4 (1) AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WP/14385/2022HC BombayHCBM01045183202205 March 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 held that the issues in the present petition are covered by its recent judgment in Godrej Industries Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai and Ors. Consequently, the impugned order dated 26th July 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) and the notice dated 27th July 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were quashed and set aside. Any consequential notices or orders also stood quashed. The Court explicitly stated that the petition was disposed of only on the issue of limitation, and the petitioner was at liberty to raise other contentions independently if the need arose in another matter. The ratio decidendi is that if a case is covered by a binding precedent of the same court, the court should follow it to ensure consistency and avoid multiplicity of litigation.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Prachi Kshitij Thakur, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated 26th July 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a notice dated 27th July 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act. These actions were taken by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1). The assessment year in question is 2014-2015. The petitioner's counsel stated that the issue in the petition would be covered by a recent judgment of the High Court in Godrej Industries Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai and Ors. The counsel for the revenue agreed with this submission.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order and notice are liable to be quashed and set aside on the grounds raised by the petitioner, particularly in light of the judgment in Godrej Industries Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai and Ors. (mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural compliance). Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that the issues in the present petition are covered by the aforementioned judgment of this Court. Revenue's contention: The revenue's counsel agreed that the issues are covered by the cited judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1/2 976-aswp-14385-2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 14385 OF 2022 Prachi Kshitij Thakur …Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1) & Ors. …Respondents Mr. C. M. Lokesh i/b PRH Juris Consults for Petitioner. Mr. Ajeet Manwani for Respondents-Revenue. CORAM: K. R. SHRIRAM & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATED: 5th March 2024 PC :

1.

Counsel for Petitioner states that this petition relates to Assessment Year 2014-2015. 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 order dated 26th July 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) and the notice dated 27th July 2022 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 dated 28th February 2024. Gitalaxmi

2/2 976-aswp-14385-2022.doc limitation, Petitioner may raise the other contentions raised in this petition independently, if the need arise in other matter. (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (K. R. SHRIRAM, J.) Gitalaxmi GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR Date: 2024.03.06 12:08:20 +0545

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →