ORANGE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/17055/2023HC KarnatakaKAHC01039665202323 November 2023Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. The Court noted that the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner were undisputed. The petitioner had argued that the question of taxability of amounts received by it over the years, for AY 2018-19, was no longer res integra, citing a prior Division Bench decision in ITA No. 160/2015 and connected matters, which had been applied to dispose of earlier writ petitions concerning AY 2010-11. Since the revenue did not dispute this submission, the Court found no impediment to quashing the impugned notice and the proceedings initiated thereunder. The operative direction was to quash the notice dated April 7, 2022, and the order dated April 7, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, thereby effectively setting aside the reassessment proceedings for AY 2018-19.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Orange, a French company, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging a notice dated April 7, 2022, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Assessing Officer) initiating reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. The petitioner also sought to quash an order dated April 7, 2022, passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the same AY. The dispute pertains to the taxability of amounts received by the petitioner over several years. The petitioner's counsel submitted that a similar issue concerning AY 2010-11 was previously considered by the High Court in other writ petitions, which were disposed of in light of a Division Bench decision in ITA No. 160/2015 and connected matters, implying the question was no longer res integra.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated April 7, 2022, issued by the Assessing Officer initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2018-19 is liable to be quashed? 2. Whether the order dated April 7, 2022, passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for AY 2018-19 is liable to be quashed? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the issue of taxability of amounts received by it over the years, for AY 2018-19, was no longer res integra in view of a prior decision of a Division Bench of the High Court in ITA No. 160/2015 and connected matters, which had been applied in disposing of earlier writ petitions concerning AY 2010-11. The petitioner sought to quash the impugned notice and order based on this precedent. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue (respondents 1, 2, and 4) in opposition to the petitioner's submissions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148A(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2023:KHC:42251 WP No. 17055 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 17055 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

ORANGE 111 QUAI DU PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT 92130 ISSY-LES-MOULINEAUX FRANCE, REPRESENTED BY IS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR BENOIT DELAPLACE …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARPEET SINGH AJMANI AND SRI. YOGESHA B., ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE 2(2), ROOM NO 430, 4TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU 560095

2.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, ROOM NO 741, 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU 560095

3.

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED 10TH FLOOR,

Digitally signed by NARASIMHA MURTHY VANAMALA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2023:KHC:42251 WP No. 17055 of 2023

BIRLA CENTURION, CENTURION MILLS COMPOUND, PANDURANG BUDKKAR MARG, WORLI, MUMBAI 400030 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTORS

4.

THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI 110001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.DILIP, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2 AND R4; NOTICE TO R3 IS D/W)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DT. 07.04.2022 (IMPUGNED NOTICE, MARKED AS ANNX-C) VIDE NO. ITBA/AST/F/148A/2022-23/1042618268(1) ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER INITIATING REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER FOR AY 2018-19; QUASH THE ORDER DT. 07.04.2022 (MARKED AS ANNX-D) VIDE NO. ITBA/AST/S/148- 1/2022-23/1042618970(1) PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 148A(D) OF THE ACT FOR AY 2018-19.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

- 3 -

NC: 2023:KHC:42251 WP No. 17055 of 2023

ORDER

It is submitted on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the question for consideration would be the taxability of the amounts received by petitioner over a period of years. This question insofar as the assessment year 2010-11 was pending consideration before this Court in W.P.No.51999/2019 and W.P.No.53137/2008, and these writ petitions are disposed of holding that such question is no longer res integra in view of the decision of a Division Bench in ITA No.160/2015 and connected matters.

The submissions remain undisputed, and therefore the petition is allowed quashing the notice impugned and the impugned proceeding in this petition.

SD/- JUDGE RB

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →