Maharashtra State Electricity Board v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J. WRIT PETITION NO. 1000 OF 2001 Maharashtra State Electricity Board..Petitioner Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors...Respondents ................... Mr. Rajesh Poojary i/by Mulla & Mulla for the PetitionerMr. Rajesh Poojary i/by Mulla & Mulla for the Petitioner ................... CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : MARCH 5, 2020. P.C.: 1.Heard Mr. Rajesh Poojary, learned counsel for thepetitioner. 2.This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia, was filed by the Maharashtra State Electricity Boardassailing notices issued by the Income Tax Departmentunder Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as well asfor refund of an amount of Rs. 155.62 Crores recovered byrespondent No. 1 from the banks of the petitioner. 3.On the last occasion, Mr. Poojary sought for time toascertain from the petitioner as to whether the reliefs soughtfor have been obtained and whether the writ petitionsurvives for adjudication. 4.Today, when the matter is called upon, Mr. Poojary, oninstructions, submits that in all probability, the recoveredamount has been refunded to the petitioner / adjusted byrespondent No. 1 with subsequent dues of the petitioner.However, since this is an old pending matter, certainreconciliation of the accounts may still be necessary. Hesubmits that in the event, any grievance of the petitionersubsists pertaining to refund of the aforesaid amount,petitioner may be given liberty to approach the Court forrevival of the writ petition. 5. We agree with the submissions made by Mr. Poojary. 6.Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as havingbeen rendered infructuous with the liberty as prayed for. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ UJJAL BHUYAN, J. ] Digitallysigned byRavindraRavindra M.AmberkarM.Date:Amberkar2020.03.0617:08:10+0530 2 of 2