M/s.Virtusa Consulting Services Private Limited V. Union of India and another

WP/22476/2021

AI Insights

The case involved M/s. Virtusa Consulting Services Private Limited, represented by its director Mr. Vasu Pendyala, who filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Union of India and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The petition sought to quash a notice dated 29.06.2021 issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2016-17, and to declare certain explanations in notifications as unconstitutional. The petitioner also sought to dispense with the filing of a certified copy of the impugned notice, which was received via email, and to stay the operation of the notice. However, the petitioner later decided to withdraw the writ petition, rendering it infructuous.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 674245 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-12-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
• Assessee Lawyers: G CHETTY
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2016-17; Income Tax; Notice Quashing; Writ petition; Unconstitutional Notification
• Section: 148; 151

Judgement Text

"[ 32951 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C,V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 22476 OF 2021 Between M/s.Virtusa Consulting Services Private Limited, Sy. No. 115lPar1, Plot No. 10, lr,lanakramguda Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Hyderabad, Telangana, 500008 Represented by its Director, Mr. Vasu Pendyala. ...PETITIONER AND 1. Union of lndia and another, through the Ministry of Finance,Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi, Delhi - 110 001. 2. Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax. Circle, 8(1), Signature Towers, Sy. No. 6(P) of Kondapur, Sy. 37(P) of Kothaguda, Opp. Botanical Gardens. Serlingampally. R.R. District, Hyderabad, Telangana 500084 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Afticle 226 of the Constitulion of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased be pleased to (a)lssue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing the impugned notice dated 29.06.2021 issued by Respondent No.2 under section 148 of the Income Tax A.ct. 1961. for the Assessment Year 2016-17 . (b) Declare the Explanation to clause (A)(a) of Notification No. 2012021 dated 31.03.2021 and Explanation to clause (AXb) of Notificaticn No. 38 of 2021 dated 27.04.2021 as u nconstitutional and ultra-vires the parent act. r.A.N9.1 OF 2021 IN/AND 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 dispense with the filing of the certified copy of the impugned assessmenU re-assessment notice 29.06.2021 issued by Respondent No.2 under section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, relating to the Assessment Year 2016-17as the same was sent to the Petitioner by e-mail only and the Petitioner has filed e-mail copy of the same. 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 grant stay of operation of the lmpugned Notice dated 29.06.2021 issued by Respondent No.2 under section 148 of the lncome Tax Act, 1961, relating to the Assessment Year 2016-17 . Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondents: ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER ll rt I lA NO: 1 OF 2021 lA NO: 2 OF 2021 L I i E B AND THE HON'BI,E SRI TI] CE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY LA.No.1 ot 2021in /& W.P.No. 2247 6 of 2027 COMMON ORDER : tPer the !1on'ble rtc Chief Jurm t tjjal Bhgan) Heard Mr. G.Narcnder Chetty, learned counsel [or the petitioner; Mr. Il.Mukherjce, leal.rcd counscl represcnting learned Depury Soiicitor General of India for respondcnt No.1; and Mr. I(Raji Reddy, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Commercial'l-ax for respondent No.2. 2. Learned counscl for the petitioner submits that petitioner would lkc to withdraw the writ petition as the same has become infructuous. 3. In vierv of above, this writ petition as well as I.A.No.1 of 2021 fi.led lor dispensing with the recluiremcnt of filing the irnpugned nodce dated 29.06.021 issued by rcspondent No.2, are dismissed on withdrawal. No costs. As a sequel, misccllaneous petitions, pending if any, stand THE I I dismrssed- - -44 I //TRUE COPY// SD/-B.SATYAVATHI DEPUTYEEGISTRAR sEcffi oFFlcER To, 1. One CC to SRl. G NARENDRA CHETTY Advocate [OPUC] 2. one cc to sRl. nssrsrnr'rl doiicnon GENERAI oF INDIA' toPuc] 3. Two CD CoPies PB I I S I HIGH COURT DATED:0711212022 51ATE Or I DESP A1 ORDER I.A.NO.1 0F 2021 IN/AND WP.No.22476 of 2021 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS + o $t .,1) o :/ I '\"* .t^ "