Wp/17821/2022 Of Ooredoo Q P S C v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

Digitallysigned byNARASIMHAMURTHYVANAMALALocation:HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD -WRIT PETITION NO. 17821 OF 2022 (TIT) BETWEEN: OOREDOO Q P S C M/S. OOREDOO QATAR (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. QTEL) C/O DHRUVA ADVISORS NO.5/1, PRESTIGE TERRACES, 2 FLOOR, UNION STREET, INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001 (AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MR.MUKESH SHAH, S/O ROSHANLAL SHAH, AGED 41 YEARS) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGENDRA KUMAR JAIN AND SMT. GEETHA RANI K., ADVOCATES) AND: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE-2(2) 4 FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, 80FT ROAD, BENGALURU-580095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AS FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED BY AN APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR OTHERWISE THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27.12.2019 ISSUED BY THE LEARNED RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 147 R.W.S 144 FOR AY 2011.12,ENCLOSED IN ANNEXURE-A; QUASH AS FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED BY AN APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR OTHERWISE THE IMPUGNED DEMAND NOTICE RAISED DATED 27.12.2019 FOR THE PAYMENT OF TAX SO ASSESSED BY THE LEARNED RESPONDENT FOR THE AY 2011.12 ENCLOSED IN ANNEXURE-B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The question for consideration in this writ petition would be whether it must stand disposed of in the light of the Division Bench’s order dated 14.07.2023 in ITA No.160/2015 and connected matters and the disposal of similar writ petitions in W.P.No.51999/2019 connected with W.P.No.53137/2008 and in W.P.No.5867/2022 and connected matters in the light of such decision. Sri.Narendra Kumar Jain, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri M.Dilip, the learned counsel standing for the respondents, are heard for final disposal of this petition. It remains undisputed that the petitioner, who is the recipient of certain amounts from Indian entities, cannot be subject to assessment if the Division Bench’s order dated 14.07.2023 prevails. However, Sri M.Dilip submits that the order dated 14.07.2023 has been called in question by the Revenue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and therefore this Court, may not make any observation on the merits of the petitioners’ grounds as against the lack of opportunity or service of due notices. Sri Narendra Kumar Jain, in rejoinder, submits that in the unlikely event of the Revenue succeeding in its challenge against the Division Bench’s order dated 14.07.2023, the petitioner must be reserved liberty to seek revival of this petition if this petition stands disposed of in the light of the Division Bench’s order dated 14.07.2023 and the later disposal of the other similar petitions. These submissions are considered, and this Court is of the considered view that the petition must stand disposed of quashing the impugned assessment order as also the penalty orders but with liberty to the petitioner to seek revival of this petition subject to the outcome of the challenge by the Revenue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court as against the Division Bench’s order dated 14.07.2023 in ITA No.160/2015 and other matters as certain other petitioner’s specific grounds are urged. The petition stands disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE SA ct:sr