Disposed

Heriminio India Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Nov 2024WP/16620/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court referred to its earlier decision in M/s. J. D. Printer and declined to decide the issue of jurisdiction on the test of Hexaware Technologies. Pending hearing, the court ordered interim relief as per the prayer clause (d).

What did the court decide?

Interim orders in terms of prayer clause (d) passed. Liberty to apply after Supreme Court decision in Hexaware case.

Heriminio India Private Limited vs Assistant Commissioner of… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

58-WP-16620-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 16620 OF 2024

¶4

Herminio India Private Limited ...Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1 Thane & Ors. ...Respondents

¶5

Ms. Aanchal Vyas i/b Dharan Gandhi for the Petitioner. Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for the Respondent.

¶6

CORAM : G. S. KULKARNI & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.

¶7

DATE : 26 NOVEMBER 2024

¶8

P.C.:

¶9

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶10

This Petition impugns a notice dated 31 August 2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, by Respondent No.1, who is the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.

¶11

Ms. Aanchal Vyas, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer would not have jurisdiction to issue the impugned notice, considering the principle of law as laid down by this Court in Hexaware Technologies Limited v/s. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Others 1.

¶12

Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma, the learned Counsel for the Respondents would not dispute such contention as urged on behalf of the Petitioner.

¶13

(2024) 464 ITR 430

Page 1 of 2

Mayur Adane

58-WP-16620-2024.doc

He, however, submitted that the view taken by this Court in M/s. J. D. Printer Pvt. Ltd., v/s. Income Tax Officer – 15(10(2) & Ors2. be followed in the present proceedings.

¶18

We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶19

There are other issues which are raised on behalf of the petitioner in assailing the impugned notices / orders apart from the primary issue as raised on the test of the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. (supra). Considering the view which the Court has taken in M/s. J. D. Printer (supra), we need to follow such orders, which would also govern the present proceedings. Hence, for the reasons as recorded in the orders passed by this Court in M/s. J. D. Printer (supra) and in regard to our observations on the proceedings involving the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. (supra), we pass the following order:-

¶20

O R D E R

¶21