Allowed

Browntape Technologies Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC5 Apr 2023WP/626/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an impugned order dated 29.07.2022 passed by the Income Tax authorities on the assumption that no objections were filed, despite the existence of acknowledgement receipts. Consequently, the related notice under Section 148 was quashed, allowing the respondents to reconsider the objections.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the order dated 29.07.2022; quash the notice dated 29.07.2022 under Section 148; respondents permitted to reconsider objections.

Browntape Technologies Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

22-WP-626-2022.DOC

¶2

Niti

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.626 OF 2022

¶5

Browntape Technologies Private Limited, H. No. 846/1(5), Flat No. F2, Xenia Building Kadamba Depot Road, Alto Porvorim, Soccoro, Bardez, Goa — 403521.

¶6

... Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 1^st Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Plot No.5, EDC Complex, Patto Plaza, Panaji, Goa -403001.

¶9

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Panaji, Aayakar Bhawan, 1^st Floor, Plot No 5, EDC Complex, Patto Plaza, Panaji, Goa -403001

¶10

Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnataka & Goa Region Central Revenue Building, Queens Road Bengaluru 560001

¶11

The Union of India, Through the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - 110 011.

¶12

… Respondents

¶13

Page 1 of 3 5^th April 2023

¶14

22-WP-626-2022.DOC

¶15

Mr Jay Bhandari and Mr P. Karpe, Advocates for the Petitioner. Ms Susan Linhares, Standing Counsel for the Respondents.

¶16

CORAM: M.S. SONAK & VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.

¶17

DATE : 5^th APRIL 2023

¶18

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per M.S. SONAK, J.)

¶19

1. Heard Mr Bhandari with Mr Karpe for the petitioner and Ms Susan Linhares, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶20

2. Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith.

¶21

3. The learned Counsel for the parties agree that the issue raised in this petition is covered by our judgment and order in Writ Petition No.627/2022. Accordingly, by adopting the reasoning in the said judgment and order, this petition will also have to be allowed.

¶22

4. In this case, the respondents issued a notice under Section 148A initially on 19.05.2022. However, after few days, a fresh notice in the same terms was issued on 14.07.2022 seeking to reopen the assessment for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

¶23

5. The record shows that the petitioner filed the objections on 19.07.2022 . The acknowledgement receipt generated by the system is produced on record. However, the impugned order dated 29.07.2022 was made based on the premise that no objections were filed by the petitioner.

¶24

Page 2 of 3 5^th April 2023

¶25

22-WP-626-2022.DOC

¶26

6. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order dated 29.07.2022 and consequently notice of the same date under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

¶27

7. However, the respondents would be at liberty to consider the petitioner's objection and make appropriate orders in accord with law. All contentions of all parties are specifically left open.

¶28

8. The rule is made absolute in the above terms without any orders for costs.

¶29

VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J. M.S. SONAK, J.

¶30

Digitally signed by NITI K NITI K HALDANKAR HALDANKAR Date: 2023.04.06 14:34:53 +05'30'

¶31

Page 3 of 3 5^th April 2023

Browntape Technologies Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Browntape Technologies Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 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

Annapurna Naik Vs State of Goa Thr. Its Chief Secretary and Anr.

Manohar Harischandra Naik Vs the Secretary Village Panchayat of Collem Sigao and 3 Ors.

Penha De Franca Community Complex, Thr. Its Secrtary, Nasir Ahamed and 4 Ors. Vs State of Goa, by Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Rajesh Verenkar Vs Mamu Hage

Zeeshan Kadar and Anr. Vs State of Goa, Thr. the Calangute Police Station, and 2 Ors.

Browntape Technologies Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and 3 Ors.