What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous. The court also deleted certain prima-facie observations made in a previous order at the request of the respondent, who apprehended that these observations might embarrass the assessing authority.

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash an order adjusting their refund against an outstanding demand. The petitioner later filed a memo stating the writ petition had become infructuous as their appeal was allowed by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the writ petition had become infructuous due to a subsequent appeal being allowed. Whether to delete prima-facie observations made by the court that could impact an assessing officer's career.

E4E Business Solutions India… vs The Assistant Commissioner | Karnataka High Court 2017

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2017

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN

WRIT PETITION Nos.51105-51107/2016 (T-IT)

BETWEEN :

E4E BUSINESS SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, 5TH FLOOR, VAKIL SQUARE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE-560029, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MS. AWANTI AGARWALA.

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI K. P. KUMAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI SURYANARAYANA T., ADV.)

AND:

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 2(1)(2), ROOM NO.218, II FLOOR, BMTC DEPOT, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560095.

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 VII FLOOR, BMTC DEPOT, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560095.

... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI K. V. ARAVIND, ADV.)

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 8.8.2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-M ISSUED BY THE

2 RESPONDENT NO-1 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, TO THE EXTENT THE WHOLE AMOUNT OF REFUND THEREUNDER IS ADJUSTED AGAINST THE OUTSTANDING DEMAND FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-2012 ETC.

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING :

O R D E R

A memo has been filed by the petitioner for dismissing the present writ petition as having become infructuous as the appeal filed by the petitioner has already been allowed by the learned Tribunal.

Therefore, this writ petition is hereby dismissed as infructuous. 3. Mr. K. V. Aravind, the learned counsel for respondents submits that in the order dated 22.11.2016, this Court has made certain prima-facie observation against the working of the assessing authority.

Although the said observation are merely prima-facie in nature, the learned counsel expresses the apprehension that nonetheless, such observations may be used to embarrass the Assessing Authority in the course of his/her service. Therefore, he requests that the observation,

3 so made, should be declared to have been deleted from the said order. 5. Since the Assessing Officer has an apprehension that the observation made by this Court may endanger his/her service career, the observations which were made by this Court by order dated 22.11.2016, in Page No.4, are hereby deleted.

Sd/-

JUDGE Np/-

E4E BUSINESS SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments