Wp/1656/2021 Of Venkatesh Srinivasan v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (It)-4 Mumbai And 3 Ors

Digitallysigned byGAURIGAURI AMITGAEKWADAMITDate:GAEKWAD2021.12.0614:50:47+0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1656 OF 2021 Venkatesh Srinivasan ….Petitioner V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (IT) - 4 Mumbai & Ors. ….Respondents---- Mr. Sanjiv M. Shah i/b. Ms. Rutuja N. Pawar for petitioner.Mr. Parag A. Vyas for respondents. ---- CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM &AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ. DATED : 4[th] DECEMBER 2021 AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ. P.C. : 1In original return of income filed under Section 139(1) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (the said Act) for Assessment Year 2018-2019petitioner contends that he committed an inadvertent mistake of offeringincome Rs.1,75,83,102/- from stock options (ESOP) although it was notassessable at all in India, but in Singapore by virtue of services being whollyand completely rendered in Singapore. Petitioner now wishes to manuallyfile revised return of income under Section 139(5) of the said Act to rectifyaforesaid mistake as per his contention by excluding same(Rs.1,75,83,102/-) from income eligible to tax in India notwithstandingsuch a revised return is time barred. Mr. Shah for petitioner has no objectionif respondents are permitted to examine the revised return to be filed onmerits and assess income under Section 143(3) of the said Act. Mr. Shahfurther states that petitioner has no objection if for this case only time limit for issue of notice under Section 143(2) of the said Act is extended to6 months after end of financial year of filing of the revised return and thetime limit for passing of assessment order under Section 143(3) of the saidAct as per Section 153 of the said Act is extended till 18 months after theend of the financial year in which the revised return is filed. 2Petitioner is permitted to file return manually. Respondent no.2should accept foregoing revised return and treat it as filed under Section139(5) of the said Act notwithstanding the time bar. Similarly, petitionerwill not press the bar of limitation for making assessments as providedunder the said Act. Thereafter, respondent no.2 should process return ofincome in accordance with law and pass reasoned order complying withprinciples of nature justice so that, if aggrieved, petitioner can carry matterin appeal, revision or avail other remedies as may be available to him. Tofacilitate the same for this case for Assessment Year 2018-2019 time limit forissue of notice under Section 143(2) of the said Act is extended to 6 monthsafter end of financial year of filing of the revised return and the time limitfor passing of assessment order under Section 143(3) of the said Act as perSection 153 of the said Act is extended till 18 months after the end of thefinancial year in which the revised return is filed. 3All contentions and rights on merits of both petitioner andrespondents (other than those for which no objection has been given bypetitioner) are kept open. 4This order is passed considering the peculiar circumstances ofthe case and may not be used as a precedent in any manner. 5Petition disposed in the above terms. (AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)