PRAGATI INFRASTRUCTURES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3 AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WP/10168/2022HC BombayHCBM01034229202216 January 2024Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE K.R. SHRIRAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that both the petitioner and the revenue agreed that the issue in the present petition was covered by the judgment pronounced by the Court in the matter of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai & Ors. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the notices dated March 31, 2021, and July 26, 2022, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the orders dated January 4, 2022, and July 26, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act. The principle derived is that if a matter is squarely covered by a prior judgment of the same court, and both parties agree, the same relief will be granted. The petition was disposed of accordingly.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pragati Infrastructures, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging notices dated March 31, 2021, and July 26, 2022, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner also challenged orders dated January 4, 2022, and July 26, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3 and others. The assessment years are not explicitly stated. The matter was listed before a Division Bench of the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notices dated March 31, 2021, and July 26, 2022, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the orders dated January 4, 2022, and July 26, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, are valid and sustainable in law. The petitioner contended that the issues involved in the present petition are covered by a previous judgment of the High Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai & Ors. The revenue agreed with this contention.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1/1 916-aswp-10168-2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10168 OF 2022 Pragati Infrastructures …Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3 & Ors. …Respondents Mr. Pankaj Toprani, a/w Ms. Kripa Toprani, i/b PRH Juris Consults, for the Petitioner. Mr. Ajeet Manwani, a/w Ms. Samiksha Kanani, for the Respondent. CORAM: K. R. SHRIRAM & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATED: 16th January 2024 PC:- 1. Mr. Toprani states that the issue in this petition would be covered by the judgment that was pronounced by this Court in the matter of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai & Ors.1. Mr. Manwani agrees. 2. Therefore, the notices dated 31st March 2021 and 26th July 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) and orders dated 4th January 2022 and 26th July 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act are quashed and set aside. 3. Petition disposed. (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (K. R. SHRIRAM, J.) 1 Writ Petition NO.1945 of 2023 dtd. 15th January 2024. Gaikwad RD 2024:BHC-AS:2293-DB Signed by: Raju D. Gaikwad Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 18/01/2024 11:44:10

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →