Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Qualcomm India Pvt. Ltd. After Merger Of ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 10 March, 2022

Author: Manmohan

Bench: Manmohan, Sudhir Kumar Jain

                          $~46, 48 & 73
                          *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                          +   W.P.(C) 4035/2022

                              QUALCOMM INDIA PVT. LTD. AFTER MERGER OF
                              CSR TECHNOLOGY INDIA- PRIVATE LIMITED. ..... Petitioner
                                          Through: Ms. Ananya Kapoor and Mr. Sumit
                                                   Lalchandani Advocates.

                                               versus

                              ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
                              TAX CIRCLE 19-1 & ORS.                      ..... Respondents
                                             Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, Advocate.


                          +   W.P.(C) 4038/2022

                              QUALCOMM INDIA PVT. LTD. -AFTER MERGER OF
                              IKANOS COMMUNICATIONS INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner
                                          Through: Ms. Ananya Kapoor and Mr. Sumit
                                                   Lalchandani Advocates.

                                               versus

                              ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
                              CIRCLE 19 (1), DELHI AND ORS.                ..... Respondents
                                              Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, Advocate.

                          +   W.P.(C) 4103/2022

                              QUALCOMM INDIA PVT. LTD. -AFTER MERGER
                              OF CSR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED.              ..... Petitioner
                                             Through: Ms. Ananya Kapoor and Mr. Sumit
                                                      Lalchandani Advocates.

                                               versus



Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:KRISHNA BHOJ
Signing Date:12.03.2022
16:54:35
                                 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
                                TAX CIRCLE 19-1 & ORS.                      ..... Respondents
                                               Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, Advocate.
                                CORAM:
                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN

                                              ORDER

% 10.03.2022 CM Appl. 12053/2022 (for exemption) in W.P.(C) 4035/2022 CM Appl. 12057/2022 (for exemption)in W.P.(C) 4038/2022 CM Appl. 12224/2022 (for exemption)in W.P.(C) 4103/2022 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Accordingly, present applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 4035/2022 & CM Appl. 12052/2022 W.P.(C) 4038/2022 & CM Appl. 12056/2022 W.P.(C) 4103/2022 & CM Appl. 12223/2022 Present writ petitions have been filed challenging the notices dated 26th March, 2021 issued by Respondent No.1 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') and all the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto including Section 142(1) notices. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents to forebear from giving effect to and/or taking any step whatsoever pursuant to and/or in furtherance of the said purported notices under Section 148 and/or in any proceedings initiated thereunder.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notices had been issued in the name of non-existent entities. She submits that it is a sine qua non for acquiring jurisdiction to reopen an assessment that such notice should be issued in the name of correct person. She further submits Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KRISHNA BHOJ Signing Date:12.03.2022 16:54:35 that the requirement of issuing notice to a correct person and not to a non- existent entity is not merely a procedural requirement but is a condition precedent to the impugned notice being valid in law. She relies on the decision passed by the Supreme Court in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, (2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC) and the judgment of this Court in Savita Kapila vs. ACIT, WP(C) 3258/2020 dated 16th July, 2020.

Issue notice.

Mr. Puneet Rai, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He prays for and is permitted to file a counter affidavit within six weeks.

Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing. Till further orders, there shall be stay of the notices dated 26th March, 2021 issued under Section 148 of the Act.

List on 07th September, 2022 along with the connected matters.

MANMOHAN, J SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, J MARCH 10, 2022 js Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KRISHNA BHOJ Signing Date:12.03.2022 16:54:35