FOOTCANDLES FILM PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ANR

WP/740/2025HC BombayHCBM01006019202404 February 2025Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R. N. LADDHA3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that a party cannot approach two forums for identical relief for the same matter simultaneously. Consequently, it would be expedient to dispose of the writ petition by directing the petitioners to pursue their appeal pending before the Sessions Court. The Court clarified that it had not examined the merits of the matter and that the learned Sessions Judge would decide the pending appeal on its own merits and in accordance with the law. The operative direction was to dispose of the petition, directing the petitioners to pursue their appeal.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Footcandles Film Private Limited and its Principal Officer Nirav Dama, filed a criminal writ petition before the Bombay High Court. They sought to quash criminal proceedings initiated against them, specifically Criminal Complaint No.75/SW/2014, which had led to their conviction by the 38th Court of Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Ballard Pier, Mumbai. The conviction, dated January 14, 2020, imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and a one-year rigorous imprisonment term for petitioner No. 2. An appeal against this conviction (Criminal Appeal No.127 of 2020) was pending before the Sessions Court, Mumbai. The respondents, including the Income Tax Officer-TDS-1 and the Union of India, argued that the petitioners should not pursue relief from two forums simultaneously.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioners can simultaneously seek relief from the High Court by way of a criminal writ petition while an appeal against the same conviction is pending before the Sessions Court. This issue turns on the principle of avoiding parallel proceedings for identical relief. Contentions: Assessee: The petitioners sought to quash the criminal proceedings and conviction, implying a challenge to the merits of the case or procedural irregularities. Revenue: The revenue contended that the petitioners were barred from approaching the High Court for the same relief that was already under consideration in the pending appeal before the Sessions Court, citing the principle against simultaneous pursuit of identical remedies.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

sg 23.wp740-25.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No.740 of 2025

Footcandles Film Private Limited a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its Registered office at 101, Saturn 729, Palimala Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai – 400 050

Nirav Dama, aged 39, of Mumbai, Principal Officer of Footcandles Film Private Limited, presently residing at 103, Ashirwad CHS, Plot No.99, Sector 16, Koparkhairane, Navi Mumbai – 400 705 … Petitioners versus

Income Tax Officer-TDS-1 [Successor to ITO-TDS-1(5)] Room No.907, 9th Floor, K G Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Building, Opp. Charni Road Station (W),

Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS), Mumbai Room No.901, 9th Floor, MTNL Building Peddar Road, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai – 400026

Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS), Mumbai __________________________________________________ 4 February 2025 SMITA JOHNSON GONSALVES JOHNSON GONSALVES Date: 2025.02.05 00:39:30 +0530

sg 23.wp740-25.docx Room No.901, 9th Floor, MTNL Building Peddar Road, Cumballa Hill, Mumbai – 400026

Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry Finance, North Block, New Delhi

State of Maharashtra … Respondents ---- Ms Fereshte Sethna, a/w. Mrunal Parekh and Mr Ashish Mishra, i/b. DMD Advocates, for the petitioners. Mr YS Bhate, for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Mr MG Patil, APP, for respondent No.5/ State. ---- Coram: R.N. Laddha, J. Date: 4 February 2025. P.C.: . Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

By this petition, the petitioners seek the following substantive relief: “The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to call for the records and quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners vide Criminal Complaint No.75/SW/2014 before the 38th Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ballard Pier, Mumbai, currently pending before the Hon’ble Sessions Court in Criminal Appeal No.127 of 2020, including but not limited to the __________________________________________________ 4 February 2025

sg 23.wp740-25.docx impugned orders dated 14 January 2020 whereby the petitioners stand convicted with a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, along with one (1) year rigorous imprisonment term to be served by the petitioner No.2.”

The learned Counsel for respondents No.1 to 4 and the learned APP representing respondent/State jointly submit that since the appeal is pending before the Sessions Court, the petitioners cannot seek the identical relief from two forums simultaneously.

It is indubitable that a party cannot approach two forums for an identical relief for the same matter simultaneously. In view thereof, it would be expedient to dispose of this petition by directing the petitioners to pursue their appeal pending before the Sessions Court at Mumbai. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.

It is clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of the matter and the learned Sessions Judge shall decide the pending appeal on its own merits and in accordance with the law. (R.N. Laddha, J.) __________________________________________________ 4 February 2025

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →