DISH TV INDIA LIMITED THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED PRESENTATIVE V. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF INCOME TAX AND ORS.

W.P.(C)/10472/2023

AI Insights

In the case of DISH TV INDIA LIMITED versus DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF INCOME TAX AND ORS., the petitioner, DISH TV India Limited, represented by Mr. Vivek Sarin and his team, sought interim relief through a writ petition. The primary contention was to have the writ petition treated as a representation to be considered by the Directorate General of Income Tax and other respondents (nos.2 and 3). The court, after hearing the submissions and with the consent of the counsel for the respondents, decided to treat the writ petition as a representation. The Additional Solicitor General, Mr. Chetan Sharma, assured that the respondents would deliberate on the petition's contents and make a decision, treating it as a formal representation, and would ensure a reasoned order is passed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 748983 (HC-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 08-08-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Director of Income Tax v. New Skies Satellite BV, 2016 SCC OnLine Del 796
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: VIPUL AGRAWAL; CHETAN SHARMA; APOORV KURUP; AMIT GUPTA; SAURABH TRIPATHI; VIKRAMADITYA SINGH; GHANSHYAM JHA; GAURI GOBURDHUN; AKHIL ASIJA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIVEK SARIN; DIBYA SINGH; DIVYANSHI SINGH; DHRUV GUPTA; SATISH KAUS HIK
• Keywords: Interim relief; Reasoned order; Representation

Judgement Text

" $~51 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 08.08.2023 + W.P.(C) 10472/2023 DISH TV INDIA LIMITED THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED PRESENTATIVE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Vivek Sarin with Mr Dibya Prashant Singh, Ms Divyanshi Singh, Mr Dhruv Dev Gupta and Mr Satish C. Kaushik, Advocates. versus DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF INCOME TAX AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Vipul Agrawal, Sr. Standing counsel for respondent no.1/revenue. Mr Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr Apoorv Kurup, CGSC, Mr Amit Gupta, Mr Saurabh Tripathi, Mr Vikramaditya Singh, Mr Ghanshyam Jha, Mr Gauri Goburdhun and Mr Akhil Asija, Advocates for respondent nos.2 and 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL) CM APPL.40592/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 10472/2023 page 1 of 3 Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date:19.08.2023 14:38:28 Signature Not Verified W.P.(C) 10472/2023 and CM APPL. 40591/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief] 2. Issue notice. 2.1 Mr Vipul Agrawal, learned senior standing counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1, while Mr Apoorv Kurup, learned central government standing counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3. 2.2 With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ is taken up for hearing and disposal, at this stage itself. 3. Mr Vivek Sarin, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that for the moment, no notice needs to be issued to respondent no.4, in view of the directions that we propose to pass. 4. The limited submission of the petitioner is that the instant writ petition be treated as a representation to be placed before the respondent nos.2 and 3, for taking a decision in the matter, albeit, after hearing the authorized representative of the petitioner. 5. We have requested Mr Chetan Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General, to appear on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3, along with Mr Kurup, having regard to the submission made by Mr Sarin. 6. Mr Sharma says that if a direction is issued by this court, respondent nos.2 and 3 will deliberate on the contents of the writ petition, and take a decision by treating the same as a representation. 6.1 It is ordered accordingly. W.P.(C) 10472/2023 page 2 of 3 Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date:19.08.2023 14:38:28 Signature Not Verified 7. The respondent nos.2 and 3 will treat the writ petition as a representation made to them, and render a decision qua the same, as per law. 7.1 Before respondent nos.2 and 3 render a decision, they will hear the authorized representative of the petitioner. 7.2 Respondent nos.2 and 3 will pass a reasoned order. 8. Needless to add, that this exercise will be carried out by respondent nos.2 and 3 as expeditiously as possible, though not later than ten (10) weeks from today. 9. Furthermore, while dealing with the representation of the petitioner, the respondent nos.2 and 3 will bear in mind the decision rendered by the coordinate bench of this court, in Director of Income Tax v. New Skies Satellite BV, 2016 SCC OnLine Del 796. 10. We have not, as is obvious, expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. 11. The writ petition is disposed of, in the aforesaid terms. 11. Consequently, pending interlocutory application shall stand closed. 12. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J GIRISH KATHPALIA, J AUGUST 8, 2023 / tr W.P.(C) 10472/2023 page 3 of 3 Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date:19.08.2023 14:38:28 Signature Not Verified "