Mr. Sham v. Amit B. Borkar, Jj Dated : 6Th December 2021

Digitallysigned by1/2MEERAMEERAMAHESHMAHESHJADHAVJADHAVDate:2021.12.07 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY17:37:27+0530ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONWRIT PETITION NO. 2763 OF 2019 Vindo Bhagwan Wadhani V/s.Deputy Commissioner of Income TaxCircle-3, Thane & Ors. ---- ….Petitioner …Respondents Mr. Devendra Jain for Petitioner Mr. Sham V. Walve for Respondent-Revenue ---- CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ DATED : 6th DECEMBER 2021 P.C. : 1Paragraph 6 of the order dated 13th January 2020 reads as under: "6. The cases arising under this jurisdiction would generally turn onthe combination of facts of each case. It is not being argued before usthat because of there was only an intimation under Section 143(1) ofthe Act, the jurisdictional requirement under Section 147 of the Actneed not be present. We have perused the reasons in this case and theobjections filed by the Petitioner giving explanation andcreditworthiness of the Petitioner. The order passed by theRespondent No.1 – Assessing Officer disposing of the objections, donot show application of mind qua the objections raised by thePetitioner. Firstly there is a reference to fact that there was no scrutinyassessment, then the objection of the Petitioner on law regardingjurisdiction is commented on then it is stated that earlier nodocuments could be examined because it is the case of intimationunder Section 143(1) of the Act, then the Assessing Officerreproduced the paragraphs regarding what is meant by “reasons tobelieve” and passed the order. In view of the fact that there isabsolutely no application of mind whatsoever while disposing of theobjections to the factual errors and factual aspects pointed out by thePetitioner, we find that arguable case is made out." 2We have once again perused the order disposing the objections and echo the observations as quoted above. In fact, we would add that the orderlacks bonafides. Therefore, the order dated 26th September 2019 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded for denovo considerationand it should be placed before an Assessing Officer, who was not theAssessing Officer, who passed the order dated 26th September 2019. 3Accordingly, petition disposed. Respondents shall inform petitionerwithin two weeks about the link / communication for the personal hearing.Respondent no.1 may pass such orders as he deems fit but it should be areasoned order dealing with all submissions of petitioner. (AMIT B. BORKAR, J) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)