Bombay High Court
Ashok Vidyut Firm vs Income Tax Officer Ward -2(3) Solapur ... on 23 July, 2025
Author: B. P. Colabawalla
Bench: B. P. Colabawalla
2025:BHC-AS:31519-DB
22.wp.5312.2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5312 OF 2025
Ashok Vidyut (Firm) .. Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer,
Ward-2(3), Solapur & Ors. .. Respondents
UTKARSH
KAKASAHEB
BHALERAO Ms.Rutuja N. Pawar (through V.C.) a/w Hetal Laghave,
Digitally signed by
UTKARSH KAKASAHEB Sneha More, Advocates for the Petitioner.
BHALERAO
Date: 2025.07.28
18:52:43 +0530
Mr.Akhileshwar Sharma, Advocate for the Respondents.
CORAM : B. P. COLABAWALLA &
FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ.
DATE : JULY 23, 2025
P. C.
1. In the above Petition Rule was issued on 17 th June 2025
and interim relief was also granted interalia staying the Notice issued
under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Today, though the
matter has come up under the caption "for directions", we have, with the
consent of parties, heard it finally.
JULY 23, 2025
Utkarsh
22.wp.5312.2025.doc
2. The above Writ Petition interalia challenges the Notice
issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on various
grounds. One of the grounds is that the Notice has been issued by the
Jurisdictional Assessing Officer when the law mandates that it has to be
issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer. This is a fatal defect and
therefore the Notice has to be quashed, is the argument of the
Petitioner.
3. It is the Petitioners' contention that this issue is squarely
covered by a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of
Hexaware Technologies Ltd. V/S Assistant Commissioner of
Income-tax, Circle 15(1)(2) [(2024) 162 taxmann.com 225
(Bombay)].
4. On the other hand, the learned advocate appearing on
behalf of the Revenue stated that though it is true that this issue is
concluded by the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra), the
said decision has been challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court,
and the Hon'ble Supreme Court is likely to take up the matter
immediately on re-opening. He has fairly stated that there is no stay to
the judgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra).
JULY 23, 2025
Utkarsh
22.wp.5312.2025.doc
5. Considering these facts, we do not propose to keep the
matter pending in this Court. Once it is fully covered by the decision in
Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra) we are bound to follow it.
6. We accordingly set aside the impugned Notice issued under
Section 148 and all other proceedings/orders emanating therefrom.
7. We however grant liberty to the Revenue to revive the above
Writ Petition in the event the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd
(supra) is set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on this issue. We
make it clear that it will not be necessary for the Revenue to file a
separate Interim Application to seek a revival of this Petition and the
same can be done simply by moving a Praecipe before this Court. It is
needless to clarify that if the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismisses the SLP
challenging the decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd (supra), there
would be no question of any revival.
8. We also make it clear that once the Petition is revived and
restored, the same would have to be decided on its own merits
JULY 23, 2025
Utkarsh
22.wp.5312.2025.doc
considering that several other issues are also raised challenging the
Notice issued under Section 148.
9. Rule is accordingly made absolute and the Writ Petition is
also disposed of in terms thereof. However, there shall be no order as to
costs.
10. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/
Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by
fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.
[FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.]
JULY 23, 2025
Utkarsh
