M/S NCELL AXIATA LIMITED V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/25138/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/S Ncell Axiata Limited, a company based in Nepal, which filed a writ petition against the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle 2(2), Bengaluru. The petitioner sought to quash a notice initiating reassessment proceedings and a subsequent final assessment order for the assessment year 2012-13, claiming they were illegal and without jurisdiction. The court considered the precedents set by a Division Bench's order and similar writ petitions, which influenced the decision to quash the assessment orders. However, the court also noted that the Division Bench's order was under challenge by the Revenue in the Supreme Court, leading to the conditional revival of the petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 751174 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2023
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No.160/2015, WP No.51999/2019, W.P.No.53137/2008, W.P.No.5867/2022
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, Income Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: KAMAL SAWHNEY
• Keywords: Final Assessment Order; Quashing notice; Reassessment proceedings; Writ petition; Illegal and Without Jurisdiction
• Section: 147; 143(3); 144C(3)

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2023:KHC:39006 WP No. 25138 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 25138 OF 2022 (T-IT) BETWEEN: M/S NCELL AXIATA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S NCELL PRIVATE LIMITED) OFFICE AT EKANTAKUNA LALIPUR METROPOLITAN CITY, WARD NO. 04 NEPAL, REP BY ITS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER (CFO) MR. ANUPAM BHAT, S/O SRI, MAKHAN LAL BHAT AGED BOUT 57 YEARS, OFFICE AT EKANTAKUNA LALIPUR METROPOLITAN CITY WARD NO. 04 NEPAL …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KAMAL SAWHNEY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.MOHAMMED SHAKEEB M MULLA.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE 2(2) ROOM NO. 430 4TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80 ft ROAD, 6th BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU 560095 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NARASIMHA MURTHY VANAMALA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2023:KHC:39006 WP No. 25138 of 2022 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED NOTICE ISSUED VIDE F. NO. 148/DCIT (IT)/C-2(1)/2018-19 DATED 28.03.2019 (ANNEXURE -A) ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT INITIATING REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER FOR AY 2012-13; QUASHING THE IMPUGNED FINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 READ WITH SECTION 144C (3) OF INCOME ACT, 1961 DATED 23.11.2021 (ANNEXURE- B) PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR BEING ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT JURISDICTIONAL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The question for consideration in this writ petition would be whether it must stand disposed of in the light of the Division Bench’s order dated 14.07.2023 in ITA No.160/2015 and connected matters and the disposal of similar writ petitions in WP No.51999/2019 connected with W.P.No.53137/2008 and in W.P.No.5867/2022 and connected matters in the light of such decision. Sri.Kamal Sawhney, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, and Sri M.Dilip, the learned counsel - 3 - NC: 2023:KHC:39006 WP No. 25138 of 2022 standing for the respondent, are heard for final disposal of the petition. It remains undisputed that the petitioner, who is the recipient of certain amounts from Indian entities, cannot be subject to assessment if the Division Bench’s order dated 14.07.2023 prevails. However, Sri M.Dilip submits that the order dated 14.07.2023 has been called in question by the Revenue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and therefore this Court, may not make any observation on the merits of the petitioner’ grounds as against the lack of opportunity or service of due notices. Sri Kamal Sawhney, in rejoinder, submits that in the unlikely event of the Revenue succeeding in its challenge against the Division Bench’s order dated 14.07.2023, the petitioner must be reserved liberty to seek revival of this petition if this petition stands disposed of in the light of the Division Bench’s order - 4 - NC: 2023:KHC:39006 WP No. 25138 of 2022 dated 14.07.2023 and the later disposal of the other similar petitions. These submissions are considered, and this Court is of the considered view that the petition must stand disposed of quashing the impugned assessment orders as also the penalty orders but with liberty to the petitioner to seek revival of this petition subject to the outcome of the challenge by the Revenue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court as against the Division Bench’s order dated 14.07.2023 in ITA No.160/2015 and other matters as certain other petitioner’s specific grounds are urged. The petitions stands disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE SA ct:sr "