M/S ANIKA APPARELS PVT LTD. AND ORS vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND ORS

WP/6253/2025HC BombayHCBM01060643202530 June 2026Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay disposed of the Writ Petition as withdrawn. The court granted the petitioners liberty to file appropriate proceedings with an application seeking condonation of delay. The protection of exemption from personal appearance before the learned Magistrate, which was granted until the next date, was extended until August 31, 2026. The court explicitly clarified that it had not considered the merits of the case, and all contentions on merits, including those related to delay condonation, were expressly kept open for future consideration in the appropriate proceedings.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, M/s. Anika Apparels Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., filed a Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court on November 20, 2025. The petition challenged an order dated August 4, 2018, passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 38th Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai. This order had issued process against the petitioners under Section 276C(2) read with Sections 278B and 278E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The Writ Petition was filed approximately seven years after the impugned order, with no explanation for the delay. The court noted the availability of an alternate remedy.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Writ Petition, filed after a delay of approximately 7 years without explanation, is maintainable, considering the availability of an alternate remedy. The petitioners' counsel, Mr. Shekhawat, argued that there were valid reasons for the delay and sought liberty to withdraw the Writ Petition to file appropriate proceedings with an application for condonation of delay. The revenue (Income Tax Department & Ors.) did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the maintainability of the petition or the delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

276C(2), 278B, 278E

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

11-WP-6253-2025.doc Arjun IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6253 OF 2025 M/s. Anika Apparels Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. …Petitioners Versus Income Tax Department & Ors. …Respondents _______________________________________________________________ Mr. Chandan Singh Shekhawat a/w Sanskruti Harode i/b Parinam Law Associates, for the Petitioners. Ms. S. M. Yadav, APP, for the Respondent-State. _______________________________________________________________ CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED: 30 JUNE 2026

P.C.: 1. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the legality and validity of the Order dated 4th August 2018 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 38th Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai issuing process against the Petitioners under Section 276C (2) read with 278B and 278E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Writ Petition has been filed on 20th November 2025. Although the Writ Petition has been filed after a period of about 7 years, the delay is not explained in the Writ Petition. Apart from that there is an alternate remedy available to the Petitioners. 3. Mr. Shekhawat, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, states that there are valid reasons for condonation of delay. Learned Counsel 1

11-WP-6253-2025.doc further states that he has instructions to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to file appropriate proceedings with application seeking delay condonation. 4. Mr. Shekhawat, learned Counsel points out the Order dated 16th January 2026, by which the Petitioners have been exempted from the personal appearance before the learned Magistrate until the next date. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as sought. 6. The said protection of exemption from personal appearance, shall remain in operation till 31st August 2026. 7. It is clarified that this Court has not considered the merits and all contentions on merits including of delay condonation are expressly kept open.

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →