MAHARAJKRISHNA BIRMANI vs. THE ASSISTANT DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
WP/1093/2023HC BombayHCBM01037208202222 January 2024Bench: 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 present writ petition is covered by the judgment in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai & Ors. Consequently, the impugned order dated July 21, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the notice dated July 21, 2022, issued under Section 148 of the Act were quashed and set aside. The Court also quashed and set aside any consequential notices or orders. All other rights and contentions raised in the petition were kept open. The principle derived is that if a matter is squarely covered by a High Court judgment, the same relief should be granted.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Maharajkrishna Birmani, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging an order dated July 21, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a notice dated July 21, 2022, issued under Section 148 of the Act. The respondents were the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and others. The petitioner's counsel stated that the petition would be covered by a previous judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The Revenue's counsel agreed with this submission. The judgment does not specify the assessment year(s) or the amount in dispute.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order dated July 21, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the notice dated July 21, 2022, issued under Section 148 of the Act are liable to be quashed and set aside? (Question of law). Assessee's contention: The petitioner argued that the present petition is covered by the judgment of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai & Ors. Revenue's contention: The Revenue agreed with the petitioner's submission that the matter is covered by the aforementioned judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1/2 434.WP-1093-2023.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1093 OF 2023 WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1094 OF 2023 Maharajkrishna Birmani ….Petitioner V/s. The Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1 and Ors. .…Respondents ---- Mr. Mihir Naniwadekar i/b. Ms. Farzeen Khambatta for petitioner. Mr. Suresh Kumar for respondents – Revenue. ---- CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.

DATED : 23rd JANUARY 2024 P.C. : WRIT PETITION

NO.1093 OF 2023

1 Mr. Naniwadekar states that this petition will be covered by the judgment of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai & Ors.1. Mr. Suresh Kumar agrees. 2 Therefore, impugned order dated 21st July 2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and the notice dated 21st July 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act are hereby quashed and set aside. 3 Petition disposed. 4 Consequential notices or orders, if any, also stand quashed and set aside. 1. 2024 SCC Online Bom 146 Gauri Gaekwad 2024:BHC-AS:3814-DB

2/2 434.WP-1093-2023.doc 5 All other rights and contentions which have been raised in the petition are also kept open. WRIT PETITION NO.1094 OF 2023 6 Stand over to 5th February 2024. (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Gauri Gaekwad Signed by: Gauri A. Gaekwad Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 25/01/2024 12:32:51

More judgments on Section 148A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →