Wp/1387/2015 Of Piramal Healthcare Ltd v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 7(3)(1),Mumbai And 2 Ors

Digitallysigned byMEERAMEERAMAHESHMAHESHJADHAVJADHAVDate:2022.04.1211:36:30+0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONWRIT PETITION NO. 1387 OF 2015 Piramal Healthcare Ltd. V/s.Dy. Commissioner of Income TaxCircle 7(3)(1), Mumbai & Ors ….Petitioner …Respondents ---- Mr. Madhur Agrawal i/b Mr. Atul K Jasani for PetitionerMr. Suresh Kumar for Respondents ---- CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM &N.R. BORKAR, JJ DATED : 8[th] APRIL 2022 P.C. : 1On 30[th] July 2015, when the petition was heard for admission, thiscourt was pleased to pass the following order: “Heard. Rule. 2 This petition challenges the reopening notice dated 21 January2014 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act')seeking to reopen the Petitioner's assessment for Assessment year20072008. The reasons insupport of the reopening notice indicatethat the basis is the excess claim of benefit under Section 80IC inrespect of its Baddi Unit, in asmuch as the expenses towards theBaddi unit have not been properly allocated for the purpose ofclaiming benefit under Section 80IC. Prima facie it appears to us thatduring the regular assessment proceedings leading to the order dated18 December 2009, specific queries were raised with regard toallocation of expenditure to the Baddi unit and the Petitioner hadresponded with figures and particulars to the queries. The orderdisposing of objections does not deal with the aforesaid objection ofchange of opinion. In view of the above, interim relief in terms of prayer clause (d).” 2 Having considered the petition and documents annexed thereto and the affidavit in reply with the assistance of counsel,we are in agreement with the observations made by this court in its order dated 30[th] July 2015. 3The excess claim of benefit under Section 80IC of the Income Tax Act 1961 in respect of Baddi Unit was a subject of consideration during the assessment proceedings and the reopening is based purely on change of opinion. 4In the circumstances, we allow the petition in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads as under: (a) Issue of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any otherappropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of theConstitution of India calling for the records of the petitioner’s caseand after examining the legality and validity thereof, quash and setaside the notice dated 21[st] January 2014 (Exhibit D) issued byRespondent no.1 purportedly under Section 148 of the Act seeking toreopen the petitioner’s assessment for the assessment year 2007-2008. 5Petition disposed. (N. R. BORKAR, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)