Lenovo Global Technology (India) Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:42998 WP No. 19831 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 19831 OF 2025 (T-IT)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

LENOVO GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT LEVEL 2 RBD ICON DODDENAKUNDI VILLAGE, MARATHAHALLI OUTER RING ROAD, MARATHAHALLI POST, K R PURAM HOBLI, BANGALORE - 560 037. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. PRASHANT HEGDE.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. TANMAYEE RAJKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) BANGALORE CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING,

¶12

QUEENS ROAD,

¶13

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD,

¶16

BENGALURU 560 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M. DILIP, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE NOTICE DATED 29.03.2025 BEARING NO. ITBA/AST/S/148/2024-25/1075245625(1)(ANNEXURE A) ISSUED BY THE 1 RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2021-22 AND ETC.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:42998 WP No. 19831 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:

¶25

“ a) Quashing the notice dated: 29.03.2025 bearing NO. ITBA/AST/S/148/2024-25/1075245625(1) (Annexure-A) issued by the 1^st Respondent under Section 148 of the Act for the assessment year 2021-22; and

¶26

b) Pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity.”

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶28

In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the order of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ramachandra Reddy Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - W.P.No.17352/2022 and connected matters -

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:42998 WP No. 19831 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

dated 28.08.2025 , in order to contend that the present petition deserves to be allowed and disposed of in terms of the said order.

¶32

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶33

As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner the present petition is directly and squarely covered by the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of

¶34

Ramachandra Reddy Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - W.P.No.17352/2022 and connected matters -

¶35

dated 28.08.2025, the operative portion of which reads as under:

¶36

"13. I, therefore, pass the following:

¶37

O R D E R

¶38

(i) The impugned show cause notices issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer outside the scope of Section 151-A of the Act stand obliterated. All further proceedings initiated thereto, challenged in these cases would stand quashed.

¶39

(ii) Liberty is reserved to the respondents - revenue to revive all these petitions in the event the Apex Court would hold in favour of the Revenue in the pending before it.

¶40

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:42998 WP No. 19831 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

(iii) With the aforesaid liberty and to the aforesaid extent, the petitions are allowed.

¶43

(iv) Contentions of both the parties except the one noted hereinabove, shall remain open to be considered in the event revival of these petitions would become necessary."

¶44

The aforesaid order is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case and consequently, the present petition also deserves to be disposed of in terms of the judgment of co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ramachandra Reddy's case

¶45

supra .

¶46

In the result, I pass the following:

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(i) The petition is allowed and disposed of in terms of the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ramachandra Reddy Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - W.P.No.17352/2022 and connected matters - dated 28.08.2025.

¶49

(ii) The impugned show cause notices and consequential orders, notices etc., at Annexure- A dated 29.03.2025 is hereby quashed.

¶50

5 -

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:42998 WP No. 19831 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

(iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the respondents - Revenue to seek revival of this petition, subsequent to disposal of the matters pending before the Apex Court and all rival contentions between the parties in this regard are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.

¶54

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶55

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 85

¶56

SV

Lenovo Global Technology (India) Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lenovo Global Technology (India) Private Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Fonepaisa Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax

Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Nagaraj Vs State of Karnataka

Rasha Kabeer Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Agastegowda Deepak Thirumakudalu Vs the Addl/Joint/Deputy Asst Commissioner of Income Tax

The Mico Associates Housing Co. Operative Society Limited Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax