Bombay High Court
Paypal Payments Private Limited vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax on 7 August, 2024
Author: G. S. Kulkarni
Bench: G. S. Kulkarni
901.WPL.30944.2023-F.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO.30944 OF 2023
Paypal Payments Private Limited .... Petitioner
Vs.
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax .... Respondent
_________
Mr. Jehangir Mistri, Senior Advocate a/w. Rubal Bansal, Anuj
Jhaveri, Prakhar Pandey a/w. Mihir Modi i/b. Anuj Jhaveri for the
Petitioner.
Mr. Venkataraman N., ASG a/w. Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for the
Respondent.
CORAM : G. S. KULKARNI &
SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, JJ.
DATE : 07 AUGUST, 2024 P. C.
1. We have heard Mr. Mistri, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Venkataraman, learned ASG on the present proceedings. The proceedings were listed for admission and interim reliefs.
2. During the course of hearing, issues of interpretation of Section 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"), more particularly, sub-section (1), sub-section (4) and sub-section (13) of Section 144C of the Act vis-a-vis the provisions of Section 153 of the Act falls for consideration of the Court. The issue being, Page 1 of 4 07 August, 2024 Aarti Palkar
901.WPL.30944.2023-F.doc whether the provisions of Section 153 prescribing time limit for completion of assessment, re-assessment and re-computation apply to the proceedings under Section 144C of the Act which provide for cases where a reference may be made to the dispute resolution panel.
3. On such provisions a decision is rendered by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.1, wherein a view is taken that the limitation as prescribed where Section 153 applies to the proceedings under Section 144C. Also there is one more decision of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in The Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs. M/s. Roca Bathroom Products Private Limited2 taking a similar view. Both these decisions were referred to and relied on behalf of the parties. There was quite a debate at the bar on such decision and what one is permitted to do with it.
4. We were informed that the decision of this Court in Shelf Drilling (supra) is assailed by the Revenue before the Supreme Court. On such proceedings, on 22 September, 2023 the Supreme Court while issuing notice has passed the following order:-
1 (2023)457 ITR 161 (Bom) 2 (2022) 445 ITR 537 (Mad) Page 2 of 4 07 August, 2024 Aarti Palkar
901.WPL.30944.2023-F.doc "Issue notice to the respondents.
We have perused learned Additional Solicitor General for the petitioners and learned Senior Counsel Shri. J.D. Mistri for the respondent-assessee.
Having heard the respective senior counsel for the parties, we observe that the impugned judgment shall not be cited as a precedent in any other subsequent matter until further orders. We also clarify that the operative portion of the judgment shall apply only insofar as the respondents herein are in question."
(emphasis supplied)
5. On behalf of the Revenue, Mr. Venkataraman, the learned ASG has made elaborate submissions. He has also placed on record written submissions. It is Mr.Venkataraman's endeavour to persuade us as to what would be the actual purport of the provisions of Section 144C read with Section 153 and Section 92CA of the Act to contend that as the provisions stand, a different view is required to be taken by the Court than what was held by the Court in the case of Shelf Drilling (supra). It is submitted that if the Court is persuaded with such contentions as made on behalf of the Revenue so as to form a different view of the matter than what has been decided by this Court in Shelf Drilling (supra), then a reference on the question of law be made to be decided by a larger bench on such issue of law which have arisen despite pendency of the proceedings before the Supreme Court in Shelf Drilling (supra) as arising against the orders passed by this Court. Page 3 of 4
07 August, 2024 Aarti Palkar
901.WPL.30944.2023-F.doc
6. It is informed that the proceedings not only in Shelf Drilling (supra), but in several other cases arising from orders passed by the different High Courts on the same issue, are pending consideration before the Supreme Court. The orders passed by the Supreme Court issuing notice in such proceedings, are also placed on record. It is on such complexion, the proceedings were argued before us.
7. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, we reserve appropriate orders to be passed on the present proceedings.
8. Ad-interim orders passed earlier, shall continue to operate till we pass further appropriate orders.
[SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.] [ G. S. KULKARNI, J. ]
Signed by: Shraddha K. Talekar Page 4 of 4
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge 07 August, 2024
Date: 08/08/2024 21:28:05 Aarti Palkar