Disposed

Dinar Tarcar Resources (India) Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Man. Director, Dinar Tarcar and Anr., v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Panaji and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC11 Feb 2020WP/120/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bench accepted that the freezing order on the petitioners' bank account was revoked by the department due to a communication gap in uploading an order. The petition was disposed of, directing immediate resolution regarding further refund adjustments.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed. No coercive action order as attachment revoked. Authorities to consider petitioners' version on refund adjustment.

Dinar Tarcar Resources (India) Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Man… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

 WP No.120/2020 dtd. 11.02.20

¶3

suchitra

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.120 OF 2020

¶6

Dinar Tarcar Resources (India)
Private Limited & Anr..... Petitioners

¶7

 Versus

¶8

Assistant Commissioner of
Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Panaji & Ors..... Respondents

¶9

Mr. Nikhil Vaze, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Ms. A. Razaq, Advocate for the Respondent.

¶10

Coram:- M.S. SONAK &

¶11

 SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR, JJ.

¶12

Date:- 11th February, 2020

¶13

ORAL ORDER(Per M.S. Sonak, J.)

¶14

 Learned counsel for the parties state that there is no difficulty
for this Bench to take up this matter.

¶15

2. Heard Mr. Vaze, for the petitioners and Ms. Razaq, for the respondent.

¶16

3. Ms. Razaq states that the order to freeze the bank account of the petitioners has been revoked with immediate effect. In fact, she placed

¶17

2 WP No.120/2020 dtd. 11.02.20

¶18

on record communication dated 10.02.2020 addressed to the bank
informing the bank that the attachment of the bank account made vide
the impugned notice stands revoked immediately in case of Dinar
Tarcar Resources (India) Private Limited and in case of Shri Dinnar
Tarcar as well.

¶19

4. Ms. Razaq explains the circumstances under which the freezing
order came to be issued. She points out that though, the order dated
29.03.2017 at Exhibit B, page 20 of the paper book makes it clear that
no tax dues are payable by the petitioners for the Assessment Year
2012-13, there was some communication gap in the matter of
uploading of this order on the website of the Central Processing Center
(CPC). She points out that it is for this reason that even a notice was
issued to the petitioners before any coercive action could be taken.
Since, there was no response, such coercive action was taken. She
points out that no sooner this was realized, the department, on its own,
has written to the bank revoking the coercive action.

¶20

5.In order to avoid such instances, it is only appropriate that this
department uploads the orders at the earliest. Ms. Razaq, on
instructions, states that the Assessing Officer, in the present case, will
upload the order dated 29.03.2017, which is to be found at Exhibit B,
page 20 of the paper book, on the website at the earliest. Ms. Razaq
states that otherwise also, the process of digitization is on and these are

¶21

3 WP No.120/2020 dtd. 11.02.20

¶22

probably instances of some teething troubles which will also be sorted
out at the earliest.

¶23

6. According to us, with the aforesaid, the issue relating to freezing or attachment of the bank account stands suitably redressed.

¶24

7. The second issue relates to adjustment of the refund amount
otherwise due and payable to the petitioners. For the present, the
adjustment is to the tune of hardly Rs.27,250/-. Mr. Vaze however
points out that there are further refunds due to the petitioners and the
same are also being adjusted based upon such mis-communication.

¶25

8. According to us, the petitioners, can immediately write to the
authorities explaining their version of the matter and we are quite sure
that any further action in the matter of adjustments will be taken after
due consideration of the petitioners' version.

¶26

9. The petition is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶27

10. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this Order.

¶28

 SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR, J.

¶29

 M. S. SONAK, J.

¶30

ss

Dinar Tarcar Resources (India) Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Man. Director, Dinar Tarcar and Anr., v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Panaji and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinar Tarcar Resources (India) Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Its Man. Director, Dinar Tarcar and Anr., v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Panaji and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mario Cotta Pereira., Vs State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary and 3 Ors.

Bhushan Bhave., Vs State of Goa, Thr. the Chief Secretary and 9 Ors.

Trajano D'Mello., Vs State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary and Anr.

Pandurang @ Deepak M. Dhavlikar., Vs State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary and Anr.

Dr. Surender Kumar and 6 Ors., Vs State of Goa, Thr. Its Principal Secretary (Health) and 2 Ors.

Sanjay H. Shinde., Vs State of Goa, Thr. the Chief Secretary and 5 Ors.