Wp/1153/2022 Of Hitesh Steel Syndicate (I) P.ltd v. Income Tax Officer Wd 15 (2) (1) And 3 Others
High Court
07 Mar 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Wp/1153/2022 Of Hitesh Steel Syndicate (I) P.ltd v. Income Tax Officer Wd 15 (2) (1) And 3 Others
Date of order
07 Mar 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp/1153/2022 Of Hitesh Steel Syndicate (I) P.ltd v. Income Tax Officer Wd 15 (2) (1) And 3 Others, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
Digitally signedby GAURI1/2GAURIAMITAMITGAEKWADGAEKWADDate:2022.03.0910:43:04 +0530IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1153 OF 2022
Hitesh Steel Syndicate (I) P. Ltd.
….Petitioner
V/s.
Income Tax Officer Ward 15(2)(1) and Ors. ….Respondents
----
Mr. P. S. Jetly, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Sameer Dalal i/b. Ms. MonikaDokhale-Walve for petitioner.
Mr. Suresh Kumar for respondents.
---- CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM &N.J. JAMADAR, JJ. DATED : 7[th] MARCH 2022
N.J. JAMADAR, JJ.
P.C.:
1Heard the counsel and also considered the averments in thepetition. In our view, the following order will meet with the interest of
justice because we are satisfied that the concerned authority, which hasdisposed petitioner’s objections, has not dealt with all the points raised by
petitioner :
(a) the order signed on 3[rd] February 2022, which isannexed to the notice dated 3[rd] February 2022issued under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (the Act), is quashed and set aside and thematter is remanded to the Jurisdictional AssessingOfficer (JAO), who shall consider the objectionsafresh and pass an order;
(b) the JAO shall provide the documents asked forby petitioner in the objections filed to the reopeningwithin two weeks from the date this order isuploaded;
(c) within two weeks thereafter, petitioner shall filefurther submissions/objections to the notice issuedunder Section 148 of the Act;
(d) petitioner’s objections shall be disposed aftergiving a personal hearing, notice of which shall begiven atleast seven working days in advance;
(e) If the JAO is going to rely on any order orjudgment of any High Court or Tribunal, then a listthereof shall be provided to petitioner alongwiththe notice of personal hearing so that petitionermay be able to deal with/distinguish thoseorders/judgments.
(f) The order disposing the objections shall bepassed within six weeks from the date of this orderbeing uploaded.
(g) The time, from the date on which this petitionwas lodged, i.e., 21[st] February 2022 until the orderon objections is passed, be excluded.
2Petition accordingly disposed.
3We clarify that we have not made any observation on the merits
of the case.
(N.J. JAMADAR, 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.