M/S FLIPKART INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED V. UNION OF INDIA

WP/6533/2018

AI Insights

M/s Flipkart India Private Limited filed a writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India against the Union of India and other respondents, challenging an interlocutory order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal had directed the petitioner to pay 50% of the tax demand and furnish a bank guarantee for the balance. The petitioner contested the high pitched assessment and the consequent demand. The High Court, considering the urgency and the upcoming final hearing date set by the Tribunal, modified the Tribunal's order to require a further deposit of Rs.10 Crores and emphasized the non-adjournment of the hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 678423 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 15-02-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Google India Pvt. Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: E I SANMATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: TARUN GULATI; KISHORE KUNAL
• Keywords: Assessment Year; Bank guarantee; High-pitched assessment; Income Tax; Stay Petition; Writ petition
• Section: 25/BANG/2018; 202/BANG/2018

Judgement Text

" 1/7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI WRIT PETITION No.6533 OF 2018 (T-IT) BETWEEN: M/S FLIPKART INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR.MANJEET SINGH CHAWLA VAISHNAVI SUMMIT, NO.6/B 7TH MAIN, 80 FEET ROAD 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA INDUSTRIAL LAYOUT BANGALORE – 34. …PETITIONER (BY:MR.TARUN GULATI & MR.KISHORE KUNAL FOR MR.PRADEEP NAYAK, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL SECRETARIAT NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI – 110 001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGLA BANGALORE – 560 095. Date of Order 15-02-2018 W.P.No.6533/2018 M/s Flipkart India Private Limited Vs. Union of India and Others. 2/7 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3 (1) (1) BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGLA BANGALORE – 560 095. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3 BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGLA BANGALORE – 560 095. 5. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGLA BANGALORE – 560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY:MR.E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO DIRECT OF LIKE NATURE TO CELARE THE ORDER DAED 06.02.2018 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN STAY PETITION NO.25/BANG/2018 (IN ITA NO.202/BANG/2018) AND PRODUCED HEREWITH AT ANNEXURE-A AND AS NULL AND VOID AND HOLD IT TO BE CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND/OR CALL FOR, EXAMINE THE RECORDS IN RELATION TO AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDERS BEING ILELGAL AND ARBITRARY. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER Mr.Tarun Gulati & Mr.Kishore Kunal for Mr.Pradeep Nayak, Advocates for Petitioner Mr.E.I.Sanmathi, Advocate for Respondents Heard. Issue notice to respondents. Date of Order 15-02-2018 W.P.No.6533/2018 M/s Flipkart India Private Limited Vs. Union of India and Others. 3/7 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the Assessee, M/s Flipkart India Limited, Bangalore aggrieved by the interlocutory order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on 06.02.2018 on the stay application filed by the petitioner-assessee for the Assessment year 2015-16 in its pending appeal against the order passed by the first appellate authority viz., Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 3. The operative portion of the said order passed by the learned tribunal is quoted below for ready reference. “In the present case also, drawing support from the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Google India Pvt. Ltd., (cited supra) we direct the assessee-company to pay 50% of the demand in question on or before 28.02.2018 and furnish bank guarantee for balance demand for a period of 6 months before the Assessing Officer on or Date of Order 15-02-2018 W.P.No.6533/2018 M/s Flipkart India Private Limited Vs. Union of India and Others. 4/7 before 28.02.2018. The stay order is valid for a period of six months from the date of the order or till disposal of the appeal whichever is earlier. The matter is already listed for hearing for 17.05.2018. However, we direct the registry to advance the hearing date to 09.04.2018. The stay order is subject to condition that the assessee- company shall not seek adjournment of the appeal without any just and reasonable. In the result, stay petition is disposed of on the above lines.” 4. Various contentions have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner on merits of the case itself for assailing the impugned interlocutory order. However, this court would not express any opinion on the merit or otherwise of the contentions raised at bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard, since, the regular appeal filed by the assessee-petitioner is pending before the learned Tribunal itself and the date is fixed for final hearing on 09.04.2018. Any Date of Order 15-02-2018 W.P.No.6533/2018 M/s Flipkart India Private Limited Vs. Union of India and Others. 5/7 observation made by this Court may affect the rights of either party viz., assessee or revenue before the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, therefore, no observation is made on merits of the case at all. 5. The learned counsel for the assessee vehemently submitted that a very high pitched assessment was made and consequently huge demand was made against the assessee against the declared losses for the said Assessment year & the Assessee- Company is unable to deposit the 50% of the demand in question on or before 28.02.2018 and furnish the back guarantee for the balance amount within a period of six months as directed by the learned Tribunal. He has drawn the attention of the Court towards the figures given in the stay application filed before the learned Tribunal and submitted before the Court that the Assessing Authority raised a net demand of Rs.136.99 Crores against the assessee for the assessment year Date of Order 15-02-2018 W.P.No.6533/2018 M/s Flipkart India Private Limited Vs. Union of India and Others. 6/7 2015-16, which was reduced to Rs.109.52 Crores by the First Appellate Authority viz., CIT (Appeals) and against the said demand a sum of Rs.25.66 Crores has already been paid by the petitioner-Company so far. 6. Though normally this Court will not interfere in writ jurisdiction against said interlocutory orders passed by the Appellate Authority, which is seized of the appeal before it, but in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the fact that the appeal itself is coming up for final hearing after its pre-ponement of date on 09.04.2018 itself, and on which date it is expected that the learned Tribunal will take up the said appeal for final hearing and decide the said appeal, it is considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances, for the limited period, to direct the petitioner-assessee to further deposit a sum of Rs.10 Crores against the impugned demand within a period of two weeks with the respondent-Income Tax Department Date of Order 15-02-2018 W.P.No.6533/2018 M/s Flipkart India Private Limited Vs. Union of India and Others. 7/7 and further to undertake before the Tribunal that they will not seek any adjournment of hearing of the said appeal on the date fixed by the Tribunal on 09.04.2018. The Revenue is also directed to cooperate in the matter and argue the said appeal before the learned Tribunal on the given date. 7. It is expected that the learned Tribunal shall decide the appeal not later than three months from today. 8. The aforesaid impugned operative portion of the order of the learned Tribunal shall therefore, stand modified to this limited extent as indicated above. 9. With these observations and directions the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Copy of this order be sent to learned ITAT forthwith. SD/- JUDGE SS/- "