Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Hstn Acquisition (Fii) Ltd. (In ... vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 9 September, 2022

Author: Manmohan

Bench: Manmohan, Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora

                              $~9
                              *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                              +     W.P.(C) 13047/2022
                                    HSTN ACQUISITION (FII) LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION)..... Petitioner
                                                       Through:     Mr.Ajay Vohra, Sr.Advocate with
                                                                    Mr.Aniket D.Agrawal and
                                                                    Mr.Samarth Chaudhri, Advocates.

                                                       versus


                                    DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
                                    (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) & ORS.          ..... Respondents
                                                 Through: Mr.Vipul Agrawal and Mr.Parth
                                                          Semwal, Advocates.

                              CORAM:
                              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
                              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
                                                       ORDER

% 09.09.2022 C.M.No.39526/2022 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) No.13047/2022 and C.M.No.39525/2022 Present writ petition has been filed challenging the show cause notice dated 02nd June, 2022 issued by Respondent No. 1 under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') as well as the order dated 28th July, 2022 passed by the Respondent No. 2 under Section 148A(d) of the Act and the notice dated 28th July, 2022 issued by the Respondent No.2 under Section 148 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2014-15.

Learned senior counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner has always been assessed to tax under Delhi jurisdiction and for the earlier Assessment Year 2012-13, an assessment order has also been passed in Delhi jurisdiction by Respondent No. 2. He states that there is no order passed under Section 127 of the Act transferring jurisdiction to Respondent No.1 in Mumbai and accordingly, the impugned show cause notice issued by the Respondent No.1 is without jurisdiction and thus invalid.

Per contra, Mr.Vipul Agrawal, Advocate, who appears on advance notice on behalf of the Respondents, has handed over in Court an order dated 08th July, 2022 passed under Section 127 of the Act transferring the Petitioner's case to the ACIT (IT)-2(1)(1), Delhi. The same is taken on record. The relevant portion of the said order is reproduced hereinbelow:-

"ORDER UNDER SECTION 127 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 In this regard, the PAN of the assessee, AACCH8406N, was with Circle Int. Taxation - 2(1)(1), New Delhi. The assessee has raised objection to the jurisdiction of DCIT(IT)- 2(2)(2), Mumbai and has informed that reassessment proceeding for AY 2012-13 were initiated and concluded by the assessing officer at Delhi. Further, proceeding u/s 201 of the Act for AY 2014-15 was initiated by the assessing office at Delhi. It is further contended that no order u/s 127 was passed before migrating PAN to Mumbai. The Assessing officer ACIT(IT)-2(1)(1), Delhi had migrated the PAN on 26.03.2021 to DCIT(IT)-2(2)(2), Mumbai, basis the care off address shown in return of income for AY 2014-15. In this case, post decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal and others, notice u/s 148A(b) was issued on 02-06.2022 and the limitation for passing order u/s 148A(d) is 31.07.2022. In these facts, this order u/s 127 of the IT Act is passed.

In exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) and under all other powers enabling me in this behalf, I, the Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2, Mumbai, hereby Transfer the below mentioned case of M/s HSTN Acquisition (FII) Ltd. from the Assessing Officer mentioned in Column No.(4) to the Assessing Officer mentioned in Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JASWANT SINGH RAWAT Signing Date:12.09.2022 18:06:47 Column No.(5) thereof as the jurisdiction of the case is with ACIT (IT)Circle - 2(1)(1) New Delhi.

                                S.No    Name of the         PAN                 Source AO   Destination AO
                                        Assessee

                                1       M/s HSTN            AACCH8406N          DCIT(IT)-   ACIT(IT)-
                                        Acquisition (FII)                       2(2)(2)     2(1)(1), New
                                        Ltd.                                    Mumbai.     Delhi.

                                    The order shall take effect immediately."

In view of the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the Respondents submits that this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to decide the legality and validity of a notice issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 148 of the Act, especially in view of the fact that the initial notice under Section 148 of the Act had been challenged by the Petitioner by way of writ petition before the Bombay High Court.

In the opinion of this Court, since the Petitioner had initially approached the Bombay High Court, the averments in the said writ petition would have a material bearing. Accordingly, the Petitioner is directed to place on record a copy of the writ petition filed by it in Mumbai High Court challenging the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act dated 30th June, 2021, within a week.

List on 27th September, 2022.

MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J SEPTEMBER 9, 2022/KA Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JASWANT SINGH RAWAT Signing Date:12.09.2022 18:06:47