SHILPA BHAVESH SONIGARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS
What did the High Court hold?
The Bombay High Court held that all the writ petitions would be 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 orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the notices issued under Section 148 of the Act in the respective petitions were quashed and set aside. Any consequential notices or orders were also quashed and set aside. The court also kept open all other rights and contentions raised in the petitions. The ratio decidendi is that if a set of petitions are demonstrably covered by a precedent, the court will apply that precedent to dispose of the matters, quashing the impugned actions.
What were the facts?
The petitioners, identified as 'N G Group' and other assessees in various writ petitions, challenged orders passed under Section 148A(d) and notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents are the Income Tax Officer, Ward 28(2)(1), Mumbai, and other revenue authorities. The petitions were filed in the Bombay High Court. The specific assessment years are not mentioned. The procedural history involves the issuance of impugned orders and notices, which are now under challenge before the High Court.
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. Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argued that their matters are covered by the judgment of the Bombay High Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai & Ors. (2024 SCC Online Bom 146). Revenue's Contention: The respondents (Revenue) agreed that the petitions would be covered by the aforementioned judgment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1/2 932& Ors.WP-10013-2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10013 OF 2022 N G Group
….Petitioner V/s. Income Tax Officer, Ward 28(2)(1) & Anr. .…Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NOS.10162, 10782, 11077, 11123, 11189, 11214, 11220, 11254, 11462, 11467, 12132, 14529 OF 2022 WRIT PETITION NOS.4824, 5971 OF 2023 ---- Ms. Ritika Agarwal a/w Ms. Ayesha S. Ansari, Mr. Sandesh P. Salunkhe i/b ACE Legal, Mr. Devendra Jain a/w Ms. Radha Halbe, Mrs. Deepa Khare i/b Mint and Confreres, Mr. Mihir Naniwadekar a/w Mr. Ruturaj H. Gurjar, Mr.Mihir Naniwadekar a/w Mr. Suyog Bhave i/b PDS Legal, Mr. Sanket Bora a/w Ms. Vidhi Punmiya i/b SPCM Legal, Mr. Riyaz Padvekar a/w Mr.Tanzil R. Padvekar a/w Mr. Tejal Kharkar for Petitioners-Assessees in respective matters. Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w Ms. Mohinee Chougale, Ms. Jyoti Yadav, Ms. Gauri Kullkarni, Ms. Shilpa Goel a/w Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma, Mr. Ajeet Manwani a/w Ms. Samiksha Kanani for Respondents-Revenue in respective matters ---- CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATED : 23rd JANUARY 2024 P.C. : 1 Counsel for petitioners state that all these petitions 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. Counsel for respondents agree. 2 Therefore, impugned orders passed under Section 148 (A)d of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and the notices issued under Section 1. 2024 SCC Online Bom 146 Gauri Gaekwad 2024:BHC-AS:3842-DB
2/2 932& Ors.WP-10013-2022.doc 148 of the Act in the respective petitions are hereby quashed and set aside. 3 Petitions disposed. 4 Consequential notices or orders, if any, also stand quashed and set aside. 5 All other rights and contentions which have been raised in the petitions are also kept open. (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) Gauri Gaekwad Signed by: Gauri A. Gaekwad Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 25/01/2024 12:56:46
More judgments on Section 148A
- Rajesh Kumar Khandelwal, Jaipur vs ITO Ward 5(1), JaipurITA 21/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Kamleshkumar Somalal Bhatt, Himatnagar vs Income Tax Ofifcer, Ward 1, HimatnagarITA 2130/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Nitinbhai Nanalal Badani, Rajkot vs CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal…ITA 658/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026