2025 (4) TMI 1223 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of reopening of assessment - HELD THAT - We issue Rule in this Petition. Respondents waive service after Rule. Liberty to the parties to apply after appropriate orders are passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court and/or final decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the challenge to this Court s decision in Hexaware Technologies Limited 2024 (5) TMI 302 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT As far as interim relief is concerned we are not inclined to grant the same since we have noticed the delay in approaching this Court after the impugned order was passed and also in the wake of the fact that prior to issuance of the order under Section 148A(d) a show cause notice u/s 148A(b) was issued to which the petitioner has responded. However pursuant to the assessment notice u/s 142(1) the petitioner once again sought to raise objection to the reassessement proceedings relying upon the decision of this Court in Hexaware Technologies Limited 2024 (5) TMI 302 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT which is presently pending before the Apex Court. We may observe that once an order u/s 148A(d) has already been passed deciding the objection raised it is not permissible for the petitioner to keep on raising the objection. There is no explanation for the delay in approaching this Court after the order u/s 148A(d) was passed.

Summary

The Bombay High Court, in an order dated 30 June 2023 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, addressed the reopening of the petitioner's assessment for AYs 2015-16, 2016-17, and 2018-19. The Court noted reliance on a coordinate bench decision in J D Printers Pvt Ltd v. ITO (Writ Petition No.12187 of 2024) and issued Rule in the petition, with service waived by respondents.The Court granted liberty to apply after the Supreme Court's orders or final decision on the challenge to the High Court's ruling in Hexaware Technologies Ltd v. ACIT & Ors. (2024) 464 ITR 43, which is pending before the Apex Court.Crucially, the Court declined interim relief citing delay in approaching the Court post the Section 148A(d) order and the petitioner's prior response to a show cause notice under Section 148A(b). It emphasized that "once an order under Section 148A(d) has already been passed deciding the objection raised, it is not permissible for the petitioner to keep on raising the objection." The Court was "not satisfied with the urgency" and allowed the assessment proceedings to continue, rejecting interim relief.The matter is listed for further orders on 7 April 2025.