ORANGE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/17329/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01035252202123 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 remained undisputed. Specifically, the petitioner submitted that the question of taxability of amounts received over the years, concerning AY 2010-11, was pending before the Court in other writ petitions. These petitions were disposed of by holding that the question was no longer res integra in view of a Division Bench decision in ITA No.160/2015 and connected matters. Based on these undisputed submissions, the Court found no reason to continue the reassessment proceedings. Consequently, the impugned notice and the impugned proceeding were quashed. The operative direction was to quash the notice and the proceedings.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Orange, a French company, challenged a notice dated March 28, 2021, initiating reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13, and an order dated September 9, 2021, passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) disposing of objections against the petitioner, thereby confirming the continuation of these reassessment proceedings. The petitioner sought to quash both the notice and the order. The revenue, represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation), along with the Central Board of Direct Taxes, were the respondents. Vodafone Idea Limited was also a respondent, but notice to it was dispensed with. The case was heard by the High Court of Karnataka.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated March 28, 2021, initiating reassessment proceedings for AY 2012-13 is valid and should be quashed? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961). 2. Whether the order dated September 9, 2021, passed by the Assessing Officer, confirming the continuation of reassessment proceedings for AY 2012-13, is valid and should be quashed? (Question of law and fact, concerning the AO's power to proceed with reassessment). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the taxability of amounts received by it over the years, for AY 2010-11, was pending before the High Court in other writ petitions. These petitions were disposed of based on a Division Bench decision in ITA No.160/2015 and connected matters, implying the issue was no longer res integra. This precedent, it is implied, would also apply to AY 2012-13. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific arguments from the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

NC: 2023:KHC:42251 WP No. 17329 of 2021

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. 17329 OF 2021 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

ORANGE 78 RUE OLIVAIER DE SERRES PARIS (FRANCE) REPRESENTED BY ITS 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 - 560 095

2.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION ROOM NO. 741, 7TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FT ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095

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

- 2 -

NC: 2023:KHC:42251 WP No. 17329 of 2021

3.

VODAFONE IDEA LIMITED 10TH FLOOR, BIRLA CENTURION, CENTURION MILLS COMPOUND PANDURANG BUDKKAR MARG WORLI, MUMBAI - 400 030 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTORS

4.

THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT NEW DELHI - 110 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.DILIP, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2 AND R4; NOTICE TO R3 IS D/W)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DTD.28.3.2021 IMPUGNED NOTICE MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER INITIATING REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER FOR AY 2012-13; QUASH THE ORDER DTD.09.09.2021 (MARKED AS ANNEXURE-N) PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISPOSING OFF OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE PETITIONER THEREBY CONFIRMING CONTINUATION OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR AY 2012-13.

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

- 3 -

NC: 2023:KHC:42251 WP No. 17329 of 2021

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

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →