MADHUKAR BALWANT WAGHMARE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 PUNE AND ORS
What did the High Court hold?
The Bombay High Court held that the issue in all the petitions was covered by its previous reasoned orders in Rajendra Lilachand Sanghavi and Panacea Unique Star Developers. Consequently, the Court directed the respondents (Revenue) to act in furtherance of the declarations made by the petitioners under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 (IDS). Specifically, the Revenue was ordered to issue Form 4 under the IDS within four weeks from the date of the order. This action was to be taken after giving credit for all amounts paid by the petitioners, including advance tax and self-assessment tax. As a consequential relief, the assessment orders, along with the demand notices and penalty notices issued, were quashed and set aside. The petitions were disposed of with these directions.
What were the facts?
These are four writ petitions filed before the Bombay High Court concerning the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 (IDS). The petitioners include M/s. Shri Anand Venkateshwar Associates, Anil Vasant Pisal, Aakash Erectors Private Limited, and Madhukar Balwant Waghmare. The petitions challenge actions taken by the Income Tax Department. The revenue, represented by various Income Tax authorities, is the respondent. The core of the dispute revolves around the declaration made by the petitioners under the IDS and the subsequent actions by the revenue. The petitions were heard together by the Bombay High Court.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the respondents (Revenue) are bound to act in furtherance of the declarations made by the petitioners under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 (IDS) and issue the requisite Form 4, considering all payments made by the petitioners. Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argue that their issue is covered by two prior reasoned orders of the Bombay High Court in Rajendra Lilachand Sanghavi v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Pune and Ors. and Panacea Unique Star Developers v. Union of India. Revenue's Contention: The respondents-Revenue concur with the petitioners' submission that the issue is covered by the aforementioned High Court orders.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (4 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
1/3 909-aswp-11894-2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.11894 OF 2022 M/s. Shri Anand Venkateshwar Associates …Petitioner Versus Union of India Through Ministry of Finance Dept. and Anr. …Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1367 OF 2023 Anil Vasant Pisal …Petitioner Versus Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistan Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer and Ors. …Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.5822 OF 2023 Aakash Erectors Private Limited Through its Director, Sanjay Chandanmal Jain …Petitioner Versus The Income Tax Officer Ward 8(1), Pune …Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4903 OF 2024 Madhukar Balwant Waghmare ...Petititioner Versus Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2, Pune & Ors. …Respondents Mr. Sanket Bora, with Vidhi Punmiya, i/by SPCM Legal, for Petitioners in WP 11894/2022 and WP 5822/2023. Mr. Pradeep Jetly, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Sham Walve, Sanket Bora and Vidhi Punmiya i/by SPCM Legal for Petitioner in WP 4903/2024. Mr. Sham Walve, with Mr. Siddharth Wakankar, for Petitioner in WP 1367/2023. Mr. Vikas T. Khanchandani, for Respondents-Revenue in WP Shivgan SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN Digitally signed by SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN Date: 2024.04.04 15:18:56 +0530
2/3 909-aswp-11894-2022.doc 1367/2023 and WP 4903/2024. Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondents-Revenue in WP 11894/2022 and WP 5822/2023. CORAM: K. R. SHRIRAM & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATED: 3rd April, 2024 PC:- 1. At the outset, Mr. Khanchandani undertakes to file vakalatnama on behalf of the Respondents-Revenue in Writ Petition No.1367 of 2023 and Writ Petition No.4903 of 2024 in place of Mr. Manwani. Undertaking accepted. Registry to take the vakalatnama on file. 2. Mr. Jetley, Mr. Sham Walve and Mr. Sanket Bora state that the issue in these Petitions is covered by two reasoned orders passed by this Court in Rajendra Lilachand Sanghavi v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Pune and Ors.1 and in Panacea Unique Star Developers v. Union of India2. Mr. Suresh Kumar and Mr. Khanchandani appearing for the Respondents-Revenue concur. 3. Therefore, Petitions are disposed with the following directions: (a) Respondents to act in furtherance of the declaration made by Petitioners under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 (“IDS”) read with IDS Rules and issue Form 4 under the IDS within four weeks from today after giving credit to all 1 Writ Petition No.5134 of 2022 dtd. 7th March 2024. 2 Writ Petition No.7026 of 2023 dtd. 11th March 2024. Shivgan
3/3 909-aswp-11894-2022.doc amounts paid including the advance tax and self assessment tax, as the case may be. (b) Consequently, the assessment orders passed together with the demand notice and penalty notice issued are also quashed and set aside. 4. Petitions disposed.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (K. R. SHRIRAM, J.) Shivgan
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
