Allowed

Sunil Bhimashankar Walse v. the Principal Commissioner Income Tax and Others

Bombay HC20 Mar 2024WP/1854/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court at Aurangabad allowed Writ Petition challenging the validity of an income tax reassessment notice issued under Section 148. Court held that since the Department failed to prove the escape of income exceeded 50 lakhs or the notice fell within three years, issuance was invalid.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed in terms of prayer Clause C; reassessment notice quashed.

Sunil Bhimashankar Walse Vs the Principal Commissioner Income Tax… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:6488-DB

¶2

907-WP-1854-2023.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1854 OF 2023

¶5

Sunil Bhimashankar Walse

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

The Principal Chief Commissioner Of
Income Tax And Another

¶8

...

¶9

Mr. R. R. Chandak, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. A. M. Sharma, Advocate for Respondents

¶10

...

¶11

CORAM:RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &
R. M. JOSHI, JJ
DATE:MARCH 20, 2024

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

1.The substantive prayer put-forth by the
Petitioner is in terms of clause ‘C’.

¶14

2.The only issue raised in this Petition is as
regards the escaped assessment of an amount, which is
less than Rs.50,00,000/- (Fifty Lakh). As regards the
issuance of a notice for reassessment or re-computation
under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, it is
undisputed that the notice was issued under Section 148
of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

¶15

3.The Petitioner had filed the income tax

¶16

returns for the Assessment Year 2016-2017. Hence, the
grievance of the Petitioner is that the notice under

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

907-WP-1854-2023.odt

¶19

Section 148 cannot be issued in the light of Section
149(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with reference
to the escaped assessment, if the notice is issued
beyond three years of the Assessment Year and if the
amount is less than Rs.50,00,000/- (Fifty Lakhs). A
notice in such peculiar circumstances could be issued
even within ten years, provided the escaped income is
more than Rs.50,00,000/- (Fifty Lakhs).

¶20

4.This issue is no longer res-integra. Despite
the vehement submissions of the learned Advocate Shri.
Sharma, for the Department, he is unable to indicate
from the record that the impugned notice was issued
within three years and that the amount of escaped
assessment was more than Rs.50,00,000/-.

¶21

5.Therefore, this Writ Petition is allowed in

¶22

terms of prayer Clause ‘C’.

¶23

(R. M. JOSHI, J) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J)

¶24

Malani

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Sunil Bhimashankar Walse v. the Principal Commissioner Income Tax and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Bhimashankar Walse v. the Principal Commissioner Income Tax and Others

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

Rangnath Wadju Surve and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Suryabhan Pandurang Kadam and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Laxman Machindra Ware Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Tara Bhagwan Tikhe and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its the Secretary and Others

Narayan Ganpat Ugle and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its the Secretary and Others

Sunil Bhimashankar Walse Vs the Principal Commissioner Income Tax and Others