Vodafone Idea Limited (Formerly Idea Cellular Ltd.)… v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc And Others …

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONWRIT PETITION NO.497 OF 2020 Vodafone Idea Limited (Formerly Idea Cellular Ltd.)…PetitionerVs.Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC and others…Respondents Mr. J. D. Mistri, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Nitesh Joshi and Mr. AtulJasani for Petitioner.Mr. Sham Walve for Respondent Nos.1 to 5. Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondent No.6. CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN,MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.DATE :MARCH 06, 2020 P.C.: Heard Mr. Mistri, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Jasani,learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Walve, learnedstanding counsel Revenue for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Mr. Kumar,learned counsel for respondent No.6. 2.On 14.02.2020, we had passed the following order:"1.Heard Mr. J. D. Mistri, learned senior counsel for thepetitioner. None appears for the respondents, despite beenserved by the petitioner."1.Heard Mr. J. D. Mistri, learned senior counsel for thepetitioner. None appears for the respondents, despite beenserved by the petitioner. 2.Issue notice. 3.Petitioner to serve the respondents afresh and fileaffidavit of service.affidavit of service. 4.On the next date, respondent No.2 shall inform the Courtabout compliance of the order dated 04.10.2019 passed by thisCourt in Writ Petition No.2435 of 2019; failing which Courtmay consider passing appropriate order against the defaultingrespondents." 3.Today when the matter is called upon, Mr. Mistri has placedbefore us a copy of letter dated 20.02.2020 issued by DeputyCommissioner of Income Tax-5(2)(2), Mumbai addressed to thePrincipal Officer of the petitioner. Along with the said letter, a chequefor an amount of Rs.218,10,22,063.00 covering the income tax refundincluding interest in the case of the petitioner as determined by the officeof the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-5(2)(2), Mumbai underSection 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide its order dated 16.12.2019to give effect to the order of this Court dated 04.10.2019 passed in WritPetition No.2435 of 2019, was enclosed. 4.Without expressing any opinion on the contentions raised in thewrit petition, we feel that following payment of the aforesaid amountcontinuing with the matter will not serve any useful purpose. 5.However, if the petitioner has any further grievance pertaining tothe aforesaid refund, it is open to the petitioner to pursue its legalremedies in accordance with law. 6.Subject to the observations made above, writ petition is disposedof. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) (UJJAL BHUYAN, J.) Minal Parab