MOTOROLA MOBILITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/36433/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01078209202505 December 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Karnataka accepted a memo filed by the petitioner seeking withdrawal of the writ petition. The memo explicitly requested that the petition be dismissed as withdrawn, with all contentions left open to be urged before the Assessing Officer in the reassessment proceedings. Consequently, the Court ordered the petition to be dismissed as withdrawn. No decision was made on the merits of the case, and the legality or validity of the Section 148 notice was not adjudicated. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Motorola Mobility India Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging a notice dated 12.08.2025, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(1) Bangalore, under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This notice pertained to the Assessment Year 2020-21. The respondents were the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Director General of Income Tax (Investigation). The procedural history indicates that the petitioner sought to quash the aforementioned notice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 12.08.2025 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2020-21, is liable to be quashed? The petitioner argued that the notice should be quashed. The specific grounds for this argument are not detailed in the provided text. The respondents, represented by their counsel, did not present any arguments as the matter was disposed of based on a memo filed by the petitioner.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 36433 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

MOTOROLA MOBILITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.5 BAGMANE TECH PARK NO.66/L, 5TH FLOOR, C V RAMAN NAGAR BANGALORE-560093 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR PRASHANT HEGDE,

…PETITIONER (BY MS. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR.,ADVOCATE) AND:

1.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) BANGALORE CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU-560001.

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HC-KAR

2.

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD BENGALURU-560001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.Y V RAVIRAJ A/W SRI. M. DILIP., AND SRI. VINAYAKA S PADIT., ADVOCATES)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 12.08.2025 BEARING NO. ITBA/AST/S/148/2025-26/1079551383(1) (ANNX-A) ISSUED BY THE R1 UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT FOR THE AY 2020-21.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the petition which reads as under.

HC-KAR “The Advocate for the Petitioner seeks leave of this Hon’ble Court to withdraw the above petition.

Wherefore, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to take the present memo on record and dismiss the above petition as withdrawn, leaving all contentions open to be urged before the Assessing Officer in the reassessment proceedings, in the interests of justice and equity.”

The memo is accepted and the petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →