Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
M/S Ernst & Young Llp vs Income Tax Officer on 22 September, 2025
22.09.2025
Item No. 18
Ct. 05
sayandeep
WPA 21516 of 2025
M/s Ernst & Young LLP
versus
Income Tax Officer, Ward -22(2), Kolkata
Mr. Kamal Sawhney
Mr. Nikhil Agarwal
Mr. Suryaneel Das
Mr. Nishank Vashitha
Mr. Chiranjit Pal
...For the petitioner
Mr. Aryak Dutt
Mr. Amit Sharma
Mr. Abhishek Kr. Agrahari
.....for the respondents
1. When the aforesaid writ petition came up for consideration on 7th September, 2025, this Court was, inter alia, pleased to observed as follows:
"1. The affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be taken on record.
2. Challenging the notice issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as the said Act) dated 30th March, 2025 for the assessment year 2019- 2020, the order passed under Section 148A(3) of the said Act dated 20th June, 2025 including the notice issued under Section 148 of the said Act, the instant writ petition has been filed.
3. Mr. Sawhney, learned advocate representing the petitioner would challenge the order passed under Section 148A(3) of the said Act, inter alia, on the ground that on the basis of a change of opinion, the jurisdictional assessing officer could not have proceeded to issue a notice under Section 148 of the said Act, however, since Mr. Dutt, learned advocate representing the Income Tax Department prays for an accommodation to take appropriate WPA 21516 OF 2025 instructions in the matter, let this matter be listed under same heading on 22.09.2025. "
2. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, Mr. Dutt, learned advocate would submit that the information in the instant case has only been gathered by the respondents from the insight portal only on 25th March, 2025, the issue as to whether the petitioner being the assessee did not deduct tax at source on foreign remittance amounting to Rs. 48,87,37,546/- was not before the jurisdictional assessing officer when the determination under Section 143(3) of the said Act was made on 29th September, 2021.
3. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, it would transpire from the record that by a notice in writing dated 22nd September, 2021, the department had called upon the assessee to provide for, inter alia, the following particulars qua the assessment year 2019-2020:
1. "List of persons to whom Professional fees/consultancy fees/royalty have been paid outside the country along with the tabulation of taxes withheld on the same.
2. List of creditors whose balances remain the same for the last few years and the details of deemed income as per Section 41(1), if any, accruing out of the same.
3. Copy of the Business Transfer agreement dated 18.12.2018 for purchasing of Fortune Cookies Marketing Solutions.
4. Computation of total income as per IT Act of the relevant years when 2 WPA 21516 OF 2025 rent equalization has been disallowed."
4. The petitioner had duly responded to the same. Prima facie, therefore, the respondents were aware with regard to at least the extent of TDS deducted by the petitioner in respect of the foreign remittance.
5. Be that as it may, since the respondents would submit that the aforesaid information, as to the exact extent of TDS deducted by the petitioner in respect of foreign remittance was made available only through the insight portal which percolated to the jurisdictional assessing officer only on 25th March, 2025, I am of the view that the writ petition should be heard, however, at the same time, a protection ought to be offered to the petitioner. Thus, though, the assessment proceedings made go on, however, the final order passed in the matter shall not be given effect to without the leave of this Court.
6. List this matter for final consideration under the heading "Hearing" after exchange of affidavits.
7. Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed within a period of 4 weeks after the annual vacation. Reply if any thereto, be filed within 2 weeks thereafter.
8. Liberty to mention.
(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.) 3