Wp/1685/2022 Of Bt Global Communication India Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer,Int. Tax Ward 1(3)(2)

JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1685 OF 2022 BT Global Communications India Pvt. Ltd.… Petitioner V/s. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Ward1(3)(2), Mumbai ... Respondent Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate a/w. Ms. Merlin Fernandes a/w. Mr.Himanshu Agarwal a/w. Mr. Shlok Parekh i/b. Vaish Associates forthe Petitioner Ms. S.V. Bharucha for the Respondent CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & N.R. BORKAR, JJ. DATE : 14 JUNE 2022 P.C.:- Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2.The Petitioner had filed this Petition seeking a directionto keep the proceedings initiated by the Respondent by the noticedated 24 March 2021 under Section 201(1)/201(1A) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961, in abeyance pending the adjudication by theAuthority for Advance Rulings in respect of the concerned non-resident Recipient/Payee for determination of tax liability in India. During the pendency of Petition, the Respondent proceeded to passan order on 31 March 2021 under Section 201 of the Act. Thisorder is challenged by amending the Petition. 3.The learned Counsel for the Respondent points out thatas against the order passed under Section 201 of the Act, thePetitioner has a remedy of Appeal. The learned Senior Advocate forthe Petitioner states that though there is a remedy of Appeal, therelief sought for by the Petitioner of keeping the proceedings inabeyance may not be considered by the Appellate Authority.According to us, if a remedy of statutory Appeal is available, it is notnecessary to keep this Writ Petition pending on the file of this Court.As regard the apprehension raised by the learned Counsel for thePetitioner, that contingency has not yet arisen. Considering thisposition, we find that it would be appropriate that the ad-interimorder granted by this Court in this Petition is continued for sometime to enable the Petitioner to approach the Appellate Authorityleaving it open to the Appellate Authority to consider thecontinuation of interim order or otherwise. 4.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as abovewith liberty to the Petitioner to file an appeal as against theimpugned order. Ad-interim order operating in the Petition iscontinued for a period of six weeks. All contentions of the parties are kept open. In case the interim order is not continued by theAppellate Authority, the Petitioner will have its remedy open. 5.The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. 6.We have no doubt that in case the issue of delay arises,the Appellate Authority will take into consideration that the WritPetition was pending before this Court since 31 March 2021. N.R. BORKAR, J. Digitally signedJYOTIPRAKASHby JYOTIPRAKASHPAWARPAWARDate: 2022.06.1611:06:50 +0530 NITIN JAMDAR, J.