Disposed¶19

Pfizer Limited v. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 14 1 1

Bombay HC20 Jan 2025WP/215/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pfizer Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 14(1)(1), Mumbai; Bombay High Court writ petition; Section 263 Income Tax Act 1961; order giving effect dated 31 March 2023; Principal Commissioner revisional order dated 30 March 2022; appeal pending before ITAT; direction to ITAT to dispose within six months; interim restraint on enforcement of giving-effect order for four weeks post-disposal; liberty to challenge impugned order if appeal dismissed; petition disposed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty: interim non-enforcement of the impugned order dated 31 March 2023 until the ITAT disposes of the appeal and for four weeks thereafter; liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order on all available contentions if the ITAT appeal is dismissed; no costs. ¶19

Pfizer Limited vs Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 14 1 1 — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Challenge to the order dated 31 March 2023 giving effect to the Section 263 order dated 30 March 2022, in circumstances where the petitioner's substantive appeal against the 30 March 2022 order is already pending before the ITAT.

¶13

Court's answer

The Court directed the ITAT to dispose of the petitioner's pending appeal as expeditiously as possible and preferably within six months.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

Until the ITAT disposes of the appeal, the impugned order dated 31 March 2023 shall not be enforced, and such non-enforcement continues for a period of four weeks after the ITAT's disposal.

¶15

Key takeaways

If the ITAT allows the petitioner's appeal, there would be no occasion to challenge the impugned order dated 31 March 2023; however, if the appeal is dismissed, the petitioner is granted liberty to challenge the impugned order by agitating all contentions available under the law, including those raised in this petition.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (OOCJ), Writ Petition No. 215 of 2024, decided 20 January 2025 (M. S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.). Pfizer Limited challenged the order dated 31 March 2023 giving effect to the Principal Commissioner's order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30 March 2022. Since the petitioner had already filed a substantive appeal before the ITAT against the 30 March 2022 order, the Court directed the ITAT to decide the appeal preferably within six months, restrained enforcement of the impugned giving-effect order until the ITAT's decision and for four weeks thereafter, and disposed of the petition reserving the petitioner's liberty to challenge the impugned order on all available contentions if the ITAT appeal were dismissed. No costs.

¶1

ppn

¶2

1 28.wp-215.24.docx

¶3

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

¶4

Digitally signed PRACHI by PRACHIPRANESH PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR NANDIWADEKAR WRIT PETITION NO.215 OF 2024 Date: 2025.01.20 17:47:09 +0530

¶5

Pfizer Limited

¶6

.. Petitioner

¶7

Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 14(1)(1), Mumbai & Anr. .. Respondents

¶8

Mr. Percy Pardiwala a/w Mr. Hiren Thakkar and Mr. Bhavesh Bhatia i/by Lumiere Law Partners for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for the respondents.

¶10

CORAM : M. S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ. DATE : 20 January 2025

¶11

P.C.:-

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 31 March 2023 which is an order giving effect to the order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30 March 2022 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax.

¶14

As against the order dated 30 March 2022, the petitioner has already instituted a substantive appeal before the ITAT. Accordingly, we direct the ITAT to dispose of this appeal as expeditiously as possible and preferably within six months from today.

¶15

Until the ITAT disposes of the appeal, we direct that the impugned order dated 31 March 2023 for giving effect to the order dated 30 March 2022 and for a period of four weeks thereof must not be enforced.

¶16

If the ITAT allows the petitioner’s appeal, then, there would be no occasion to challenge the impugned order dated 31 March 2023.

¶17

ppn 2 28.wp-215.24.docx

¶18

However, if the petitioner’s appeal is dismissed, then, we grant the petitioner liberty to challenge the impugned order dated 31 March 2023 by agitating all the contentions available under the law, including those raised in this petition.

¶19

This petition is disposed of with liberty in the above terms. No costs.

¶20

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶21

(Jitendra Jain, J .) ( M. S. Sonak, J.)

Pfizer Limited v. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 14 1 1

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pfizer Limited v. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 14 1 1

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vishnu Laxman Chimane and Ors. vs the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) and Anr.

Bhanudas Ganpati Patil and Anr. vs the Sub-Divisional Officer of Patan and Ors.

Amit Akheraj Chheda and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra Throu. Its Principal Sec. Throu. Govt Pleader and Ors.

Anwar Aziz Memon vs Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai through Its Commissioner

Ranvir Singh vs the Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department

Ranvir Singh vs the Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department