Karnataka High Court
Mphasis Australia Pty. Ltd., vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 11 February, 2020
Author: Ravi Malimath
Bench: Ravi Malimath
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ON THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
WRIT APPEAL NO.6799 OF 2017 (T - IT)
BETWEEN
MPHASIS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD,
NOW REP. BY ITS
AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE,
SRI SIDDHARTH GUPTA,
SON OF SRI SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
CARE OF SEMONA CONSULTANTS
SHOP NO.5, 17-19 EAST PARADE
SUTHERLAND-NSW 2232
AUSTRALIA ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI A.SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI M LAVA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX,
INTERNATIONAL TAXATION
CIRCLE 1(2),
BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD,
KORAMANGALA VITH BLOCK,
BENGALURU-560095.
2
2. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX,
RANGE-1, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION,
BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD,
KORAMANGALA VITH BLOCK,
BENGALURU-560095.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX
(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)
CIRCLE 1(1), BANGALORE,
ROOM NO.441, 4TH FLOOR
BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD,
KORAMANGALA
BENGALURU-560095. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT
PETITION NO.45711/2017 DATED 21/11/2017 AND
CONSEQUENTLY GRANT THE RELIEF PRAYED FOR.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, RAVI
MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.45711 of 2017 dated 21.11.2017, dismissing the writ petition on the ground that it is premature, the writ petitioner is in appeal. 3
2. The primary contention of Sri A.Shankar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant's learned Counsel is that there were almost eleven grounds urged for consideration before the learned Single Judge. Rather than considering the contentions raised by the writ petitioner, the learned Single Judge has merely held that the writ petition is premature and has dismissed the writ petition. It is his plea that certain important issues were raised for consideration which required to be considered. That they go to the root of the matter. Whether the contentions required to be accepted or not is secondary, but they do deserve merit by the learned Single Judge.
3. The same is disputed by the learned Counsel for the respondents. He submits that in view of holding that the petition is premature, it is not necessary to consider any of the issues involved. Therefore, it is merely a technical ground that all those contentions are required to be considered.
4. On hearing the learned Counsels, we are of the view that appropriate interference is called for. 4
5. The writ petition was filed on various grounds. One of the grounds on which the writ petition was dismissed is that interference in the instant proceedings which prima facie appear to have been validly initiated, is not necessary. Therefore, keeping it open for the petitioner-assessee to press the objections before the Assessing Authority and the Appellate Authorities under the Act to decide the objections and adjudicate on the same, the petition was dismissed as premature.
6. We are of the considered view that the contentions of the writ petitioner are required to be considered on merits, especially when the jurisdiction of the authority itself is questioned. Jurisdiction is an important issue. Therefore, we are of the view that the matter requires to be re-considered on merits.
7. Under these circumstances, the writ appeal is allowed. The order dated 21.11.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.45711 of 2017 is set aside. The writ petition requires be heard afresh on merits including the objection of the respondents that the writ petition is not maintainable.
5
8. The respondents are at liberty to file their statement of objections before the learned Single Judge. In view of the pendency of the appeal before the Assessing Authority, the learned Single Judge is requested to dispose off the petition as expeditiously as possible. Till the disposal of the writ petition, the interim order granted by this Court shall continue. All contentions urged are kept open.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE KK CT-HR