Disposed

S.H.Kelkar and Company Ltd. v. Additional Joint Deputy Assistant Commissioner and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC14 Jan 2022WP/3579/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a taxpayer challenging notices and a draft assessment order issued by the Income-tax Officer. Striking down the reference to an independent appeal, the Court directed the Officer to strictly comply with the Section 263 order's scope, restricting assessment to only the issues raised in the show cause notice of January 21, 2020.

What did the court decide?

Remanded to Respondent No. 1 with a direction to restrict assessment to issues in show cause notice of 21.01.2020 and complete within twelve weeks.

S.H.Kelkar and Company Ltd. Vs Additional Joint Deputy Assistant… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

907_WP3579_21.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.3579 OF 2021

¶4

S. H. Kelkar and Company Limited Vs.

¶5

Additional /Joint /Deputy /Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax / Income-tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre and others

¶6

… Petitioner

¶7

… Respondents

¶8

Ms. J. D. Mistri, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Harsh Kothari i/b. Mr. Atul K. Jasani for Petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Sham V. Walve for Respondents-Revenue.

¶10

CORAM : K. R. SHRIRAM & R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

¶11

DATE : JANUARY 14, 2022

¶12

P.C. :-

¶13

After the petition was considered with the assistance of Shri. Mistri and Shri. Walve, Shri. Walve in fairness submitted that petitioners are justified in alleging that respondent No.1 has exceeded his jurisdiction in passing the impugned order and also issuing the impugned notices. Shri. Walve suggests that prayer clause (a) be granted and the matter be remanded to respondent No.1 with a direction to restrict his scope only to the issue which was under consideration in the show cause notice dated 21^st January, 2020 issued under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, copy whereof is at exhibit-B to the petition.

¶14

In view of the above, the petition is disposed in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads as under:-

¶15

“(a) This Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari, or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for the records of the Petitioner’s case so far as they relate to the issue of the impugned notices dates 7^th September 2021, 10^th September 2021 and 15^th

¶16

1/2

¶17

907_WP3579_21.doc

¶18

September 2021 issued by Respondent No.1 (being Exhibit E, F & G hereto) and the impugned notice proposing variation to income along with the impugned draft assessment order (Exhibit J & K) and after going through and examining the question of the validity, propriety and legality thereof, be pleased to quash the impugned notice (Exhibits E, F & G) and the impugned notice proposing variation to income along with the impugned draft assessment order (Exhibit J & K) insofar as they go beyond the scope of directions given under the order passed under section 263 of the Act.”

¶19

Respondent No.1 is directed to strictly comply with the directions contained in the order passed under Section 263 of the Act on 24^th February, 2020. By way of clarification, he is directed to restrict the assessment to the points mentioned in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the show cause notice dated 21^st January, 2020 issued under Section 263 of the Act. The assessment to be completed within twelve weeks from today.

¶20

Shri. Mistri states that the order passed under Section 263 of the Act itself is the subject matter of an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal as referred to in paragraph 4(G) of the petition.

¶21

We are not expressing any opinion or view on that. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal will consider the same independently on merits.

¶22

Petition accordingly disposed with no order as to costs.

¶23

(R. N. LADDHA, J.)

¶24

(K. R. SHRIRAM, J.)

¶25

Minal Parab

¶26

2/2

S.H.Kelkar and Company Ltd. v. Additional Joint Deputy Assistant Commissioner and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.H.Kelkar and Company Ltd. v. Additional Joint Deputy Assistant Commissioner and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissionr of Central Excise and Customs Raigad Commissinerate Vs M/S Reliance Industries Ltd.

The Pr. Commissioner of Incoem TAX-4 Vs Kruti Lalitkumar Jain

The Pr.Commissioner of Income TAX-4 Vs Lalitkumar Kesarimal Jain

Macrotech Developoers Limited.(Successor to Palava Dwellers Pvt.Ltd) Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3),MUMBIA and 2 Ors.

Girraj Kishor Agrawal Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Central Circle 8(3) and 2 Ors.

Kamlesh Rajnikant Shah Vs Principal Commissioner of Income TAX(CENTRAL)-4, Mumbai and 4 Ors.