Dismissed

Surya Roshni Limited v. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi 7

Delhi HC4 Mar 2024W.P.(C)/3233/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a revision notice under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The Court held that the revisional authority's opinion that an order was passed without enquiries or verification renders it prejudicial to revenue, fulfilling statutory requirements. Interference was declined at this stage.

What the court decided

AI extract

Surya Roshni Limited Vs Principle Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi 7 — Income Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~85

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 3233/2024

¶4

SURYA ROSHNI LIMITED ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Paritosh Jain, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 7

¶8

..... Respondent Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, Sr. Standing Counsel along with Mr. Ashvini Kumar and Mr. Rishabh Nangia, Standing Counsel.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

% 04.03.2024

¶13

CM APPL 13358/2024 (Exemption)

¶14

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶15

The application stands disposed of.

¶16

W.P.(C) 3233/2024 and CM APPL 13357/2024 (Interim relief)

¶17

The writ petitioner impugns a Notice purporting to be under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“ Act ”] and is dated 03 January 2024. The principal ground of attack in respect to the notice is that the Principal Commissioner has failed to record any satisfaction pertaining to the assessment being prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and which according to learned counsel would be the sine qua non for invoking the revisionary powers conferred by Section 263

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/03/2024 at 11:30:18

¶20

of the Act.

¶21

We, however, find ourselves unable to sustain that submission since and as is reflected in paragraph 5 of the impugned Notice, the Principal Commissioner appears to allude to Explanation 2 to Section 263 of the Act and which bids us to assume that where the revisional authority be of the opinion that the “ order came to be passed without making enquiries or verification” , the same would itself render it prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The alleged failure to conduct an enquiry was not questioned before us. In view of the aforesaid, we find no cause to interfere with the impugned notice at this stage.

¶22

The writ petition fails and shall stand dismissed. The present order, however, shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the writ petitioner.

¶23

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

¶24

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.

¶25

MARCH 04, 2024 RW

¶26

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/03/2024 at 11:30:18

Surya Roshni Limited v. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi 7

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Surya Roshni Limited v. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi 7

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tau Devi Lal Memorial College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education

R S Memorial College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education

Dr Sonali Badhe Vs Union of India and Ors.

Safety Matters Foundation & Anr. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Vijendra Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ojaswi Bundela Vs Union of India & Ors.

Deepak Marwah, Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Mohan Lal Gaba Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Income Tax Department

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)- 3 Vs M/S. Gracious Projects Pvt. Ltd.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -I Vs M/S Forum Sales Pvt. Ltd.

The Commissioner of Income Tax - International Taxation -3 Vs Qualcomm Incorporated

Principal Commissioner of Income TAX-7 Vs M/S Rishi Apartments Pvt. Ltd.

Gautam Chawla - Erstwhile Partner of Dissolved Firm Nathumal Jewellers Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 46-1, New Delhi & Ors.

Pr. Commissioner of Income TAX-1 Vs Azalea Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.