M/S. V.M. SALGAOCAR SALES INTERNANTIONAL, BY Z. A. BRAGANCA. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE-2, MARGAO AND 3 ORS.,

PDF · subscribers
WP/317/2015HC BombayHCBM05000918201507 May 2015Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. SANKLECHA,F. M. REIS3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court set aside the three orders dated 20/02/2015, which had disposed of the petitioner's objections to the reopening notices for Assessment Years 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011-2012. The Court directed that the objections be disposed of afresh by an Officer of the Revenue who was not the author of the original order disposing of objections and not the deponent of the affidavit-in-reply dated 06/05/2015. The objections are to be disposed of within 10 weeks from the date of the order. The Court also stipulated that no further proceedings would be taken by the Revenue for four weeks from the date of the order disposing of the objections, following the precedent set in Asian Paints Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT. The principle applied is that where procedural irregularities or defects in the disposal of objections are found, a fresh disposal by an independent officer is warranted to ensure fairness.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. V. M. Salgaoncar Sales International, filed three writ petitions before the Bombay High Court at Goa challenging reopening notices dated 28/10/2014 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These notices sought to reopen assessments for Assessment Years 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011-2012. The petitioner's objections to these notices were disposed of by the Assessing Officer through three separate orders dated 20/02/2015. The revenue, represented by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax and other authorities, filed affidavits-in-reply. The High Court was requested to dispose of these petitions. The issues raised were identical to those in a previously decided writ petition (W.P.No.321/2015).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the orders dated 20/02/2015 disposing of the objections to the reopening notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Years 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011-2012 are valid and require interference by the High Court. The petitioner contended that the issues were identical to those in W.P.No.321/2015, which had been decided by the Court. The revenue did not record any specific arguments against this contention, but their counsel appeared and filed affidavits. The Court's decision in W.P.No.321/2015, which was disposed of by a separate order on the same day, formed the basis for the decision in these petitions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (3 matters)

W.P. No.252/2015
W.P. No.317/2015
W.P. No.319/2015

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
WP252,317&319/15 … 1 … IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NOS. 252, 317 AND 319 of 2015 M/s. V. M. Salgaoncar Sales International, a Partnership Firm formed under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, having its Registered Office at Salgaocar House, Off Dr. Francisco Luis Gomes Road, Vasco-Da-Gama, Goa, by Mr. Z. A. Braganca, major in age, Constituted Attorney. ... Petitioner. Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-2, Margao, having his office at 3rd Floor, Blessing Pioneer Commercial Complex, Opposite District & Sessions Court, Margao-Goa 403 601. 2. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Margao Range, Margao, having his office at 3rd Floor, Blessing Pioneer Commercial Complex, Opposite District & Sessions Court, Margao-Goa 403 601. 3. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Goa, having his office at Aayakar Bhavan, Patto, Panaji, Goa 403 001. 4. The Union of India, Through the Secretary (Finance), Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. … Respondents Mr. P. J. Pardiwala, Senior Advocate with Mr. D. J. Pangam, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.252/2015. Mr. P. J. Pardiwala, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhijit Gosavi, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.317/2015. WP252,317&319/15 … 2 … Mr. P. J. Pardiwala, Senior Advocate with Ms. Priyanka Kamat, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P. No.319/2015. Ms. Asha Dessai, Advocate for the respondents in all the petitions. CORAM :- F. M. REIS & M. S. SANKLECHA, J. DATE : 7 th May, 2015

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per M. S. Sanklecha, J.) Respondents have filed affidavits-in-reply dated 06/05/2015 in all the three petitions, which are taken on record

2.

Rule; returnable forthwith. Ms. Dessai, the learned Counsel for the respondents waives service. At the request of the Counsel, these petitions are taken up for disposal.

3.

All these three petitions challenge three reopening notices all dated 28/10/2014 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) seeking to reopen assessment for Assessment Years 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. The objection to these impugned notices was disposed of by three separate orders dated 20/02/2015 by the Assessing Officer.

4.

It is jointly submitted by the Counsel that the issues raised in this petition are identical to one raised in W.P.No.321/2015 which challenged the notice dated 28/10/2014

WP252,317&319/15 … 3 … seeking to reopen the assessment for Assessment Year 2008- 2009. We have today by a separate order disposed of W.P.No.321/2015 by setting aside the order dated 20/02/2015 disposing of the objections and placing the matter for fresh disposal by an Officer of the Revenue (other than the author of the order disposing of the objections and deponent of the affidavit-in-reply dated 06/05/2015).

5.

Accordingly, the three orders dated 20/02/2015 disposing of the objections are set aside and the objections to the impugned notice for the three Assessment years 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 are to be disposed of afresh by an Officer of the Revenue other than the author of the order disposing of the objections and the deponent of the affidavit dated 06/05/2015. 6. SMA

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →