CORDYS R AND D INDIA PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER, V. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS,

WP/18832/2007

AI Insights

The case involves Cordys R&D India Pvt. Ltd., which filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The petitioner sought to quash an assessment order and declare specific sections and rules as ultra vires and unconstitutional. The respondents included various authorities from the Union of India and the Income Tax Department. The High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous due to the merger of the petitioner with another company and the failure to pursue available appellate remedies.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 720921 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: T BALA MOHAN REDDY
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Constitutional Validity; Income Tax; Transfer pricing; Ultravires
• Section: 143(3); 131; 92C(4); 92CA(3); 271AA; 271(1); 133; 92C(a); 92CA(7); 10D(g to m)

Judgement Text

"r.) [ 3295 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT 2 Mr. Subramanian Ramanathan, Director, Cordys R&D lndia private Limited, pyj]4gq \"D\" Plot No. 17, Software Units Layout, trlaOnapur, gyaeraOlJl 500 081 ...PETITIONERS Union of lndia. reoresented by its Secretary, Department of Revenue. Ministry of Finance, New belhi Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi 1 1OOO1 , Rep. by its Chairman. The Additional Commissioner of lncome Tax (Transfer pricing), .Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004.' The Assistant Commissioner o-f,llqome Tax, Circle-1 (2), Aayakar Bhavan, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad - 500 004. AND 1 2 3 4 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewlth, the High court may be pleased to issue a wRlr oF DECLARA'iloN declaring the provisions to section 92c(a) of the lncome Tax Act 1961 is ultravires the Article i4 of the constitution of India and to declare Rule 1oD(g to m) as ultravires of section 131 to 133 of the lncome Tax Act I961 and Section 92 CA(7), Section 271 AA and explanation 7 to section 271 (1) of the lncome Tax Act 1961 as violative of Article 14, 19(1xg) and 265 of the constitution of lndia and also set aside the THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WR|T PETTTION NOjj!!832 OF 20Oz Between: 1 C-ordys R&D India Pvt. Ltd, Building \"D,' plot No.17, Software Units Lavout Madhapur, Hyderabad 500 08j, Rep. by its Dirdctor trrtr. SuUiimjiLn Ramanathan o order of the third respondent dated 20-12-2006 u/s. 92CA(3) of lncome Tax Act and consequently also set aside the assessment order dated 28-1i-2OOG passed by the fourth respondent. Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the operation of the provisions to Section 92C (4) of the lncome Tax Act 1961 and Rules 10 D (g) to 10 D (m) of the lncome Tax Rutes 1962. Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings arising out of the order daled 20-12-2006 passed u/s 92CA(3) by the third respondent, and consequently also stay all the further proceedings arising out of the assessment order dated 28-12-2006 passed by the fourth respondent. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI T. BALA MOHAN REDDY Counsel forthe Respondents: NONE AppgaReO The Court made the following: ORDER l.A. NO: 2 OF 2007(WPMP. NO: 24195 OF 2007) l.A. NO: 1 OF 2007(WPMP. NO: 24194 OF 2007) THE HON'BLE TH CHIEF IUS]' ICE UIIAI BHT]YAN o THE ON'BLE SRI AND IUSTICE C.V.I]IIASKAR IIDDY W.P.No. 18832 of 2007 ORDE ee, /b\" Holbb rhe CbieJJuttice Lljjal Bhqaa) Petltloners. Fleard Mr. T.Baiamohan Reddy, learned counsel for the t t 2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, peririoners seek quashing of the assessmenr order dated28.72.2006 passed by respondent No.4 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, t9il Snefly 'the Act' hereinafter) for the assessment year 2004-05. Additionally, petitioners have challenged the constitutional validiry of the proviso to Section 92Qa) of the Act as well as Rule 10D(g to m) of the Income Tax Rules, 1952 (briefly the Rules' hereinafter) as ultra uiret and unconsriturional. 3. This writ petition is pending before this Coun since the year 2007 without any stay. As it is, against an assessment order, petitioners had the remedy of filing appeal, r,hich rhe pedrioners did not avail. In all probabiliry the demand arising out of the assessment order has been realised. a 4. At this stage, leamed counsel for the petitioners submits that on orders of this Crurt, petitioner No.1- Clr$a R&D India Private Limited has been merged with another company ui1.,, Open Tax Coryoration India Private Limited. 5 That being the position, we are of the view that no iive issue survives for adjudication in this case. 6. However, if any cause survives, it will be oPen to the petitioners to avail their remedy in accordance with law. 7. Writ Petition is accordingiydismissed as infnrctuous. No As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand dismissed. I //TRUE COPY// 1. One CC to SRI T. BALA MOHAN REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl 2. Two CD Copies SD/. G. SIREESHA ASSISTATfT BEG,ISTRAR .l+' 1i 1 : - SECTION OFFICER- To, BB GJP ..\"r.. costs. HIGH COURT DATED: 1111112022 ORDER WP.No.18832 of 2007 DISMISSING THE W.P AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS o tt I,{ATE c* Iiii .iffi1 .: '.::...' it: (n r5 .1., ,-< .'v I o "