Bombay High Court
S.K. Ventures vs Income Tax Officer -2 And Ors on 12 February, 2021
Author: Milind N. Jadhav
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, Milind N. Jadhav
8._11-as.wpst.3189.21.doc
S.S.Kilaje
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 3189 OF 2021
S.K.Ventures .. Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer- 2(3) & Ors. .. Respondents
.....................
Mr. Devendra Jain for the Petitioner.
Mr. Sham Walve for Respondents.
.....................
CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN &
MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.
DATE : FEBRUARY 12, 2021.
P.C.:
Heard Mr. Devendra Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sham Walve, learned standing counsel revenue for the respondents.
2. Issue notice.
3. Mr. Walve, learned counsel waives notice for all the respondents. Let the respondents file their reply affidavit within four weeks.
4. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to accept manual return of income filed by the petitioner in view of a technical problem in online filing.
1 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 15/02/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2021 15:08:07 :::
8._11-as.wpst.3189.21.doc Further prayer made is for a direction to respondent No.2 Central Board of Direct Taxes to make suitable amendment in the electronic Income Tax Return (ITR) utility so as to provide an option to the petitioner as to applicability of section 115JC of the Income tax Act, 1961.
5. Without entering into the merit of the grievance expressed by the petitioner, we find that a similar writ petition was moved before this Court by an assessee earlier facing similar difficulty. Of course, in that case the assessee had not filed any representation before the CBDT highlighting his grievance, whereas in the case of the petitioner he has already made a representation but without any fruitful result. In Samir Narain Bhojwani Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle3(4), Mum,1 this Court while granting liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to the CBDT further directed that till such time CBDT took a decision on the petitioner's representation, respondents would not act upon the electronically filed return of income so as to initiate any coercive recovery proceedings.
6. Since petitioner has already filed a representation before the CBDT on 21.01.2021 alongwith income tax return in physical form, we direct that pendency of the writ petition would not be a bar to take a 1[2020] 115 taxmann. com 70(Bom.) 2 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 15/02/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2021 15:08:07 :::
8._11-as.wpst.3189.21.doc decision on the said representation of the petitioner. In the meanwhile, respondents shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner.
7. Stand over to 1st April, 2021.
[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ UJJAL BHUYAN, J. ] 3 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 15/02/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2021 15:08:07 :::