Digital India Payments Ltd v. Union Of India And Ors
High Court
31 Jul 2023 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Digital India Payments Ltd v. Union Of India And Ors
Date of order
31 Jul 2023
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Digital India Payments Ltd v. Union Of India And Ors, the High Court (2023) decided the matter.
Decision: 3.Accordingly, keeping open all rights and contentions of the parties,the impugned order dated 26[th] April 2021 is quashed and set aside.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Digitallysigned byTRUSHATRUSHATUSHARTUSHARMOHITEMOHITEDate:2023.08.0517:31:52+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3693 OF 2021
Digital India Payments Ltd.
….. Petitioner
Vs.
Union of India and Ors.
….. Respondents
Ms.Neha Sharma i/b Mr.Sriram Sridharan for petitioner Mr.Suresh Kumar for Respondents
CORAM:K.R. SHRIRAM, J &FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.DATED :31[st] JULY 2023
P.C.
1.In paragraphs 29 and 30 of the petition, it is alleged that personalhearing by virtual mode was not completed due to technical error at theend of respondents and petitioner had also brought to the notice ofrespondents about this problem. In the affidavit in reply there is no denial.It is simply stated that the contents in the paragraphs 29 and 30 aregeneral and factual in nature and hence, no comments are offered. Inparagraph 31 of the petition, it is averred that petitioner did not receiveany notice from respondent no.2 granting another date for virtual hearing.In the affidavit in reply this fact is not denied and it is simply stated thatsince it was getting time barred on 30[th] April 2021 and no sufficient timewas available, no further correspondence with the assessee was possible
and on the basis of non availability of record, the assessment proceedingwas completed.
2.When the court expressed to Mr.Suresh Kumar about theseaverments in the affidavit in reply, being unacceptable, Mr.Suresh Kumarin fairness stated that the Assessment Order dated 26[th] April 2021 be thenquashed and the matter be remanded to the Assessing Officer for denovoconsideration so that fresh Assessment Order will not contain any suchdefects.
3.Accordingly, keeping open all rights and contentions of the parties,the impugned order dated 26[th] April 2021 is quashed and set aside. Matteris remanded for denovo consideration.
4.Before any assessment order is passed which shall be made within 12weeks from today, petitioner shall be given a personal hearing, noticewhereof shall be communicated atleast five working days in advance.
5.If respondents are going to rely on any order or judgment of anyTribunal or Court, list thereof shall also be made available along withnotice of personal hearing so that petitioner will be able to effectively dealwith / distinguish the same.
6.Petition disposed. No order as to costs.
7.We clarify that we have not made any observation on the merits.
8.For completion of record, Registry to take rejoinder on file.
(FIRDOSH P.POONIWALLA, J.)
(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.