Wp/246/2022 Of M/S Maxis International Sdn Bhd v. Deputy 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. 246 OF 2022 (TIT) C/w. -WRIT PETITION NO. 250 OF 2022 (TIT),-WRIT PETITION NO. 287 OF 2022 (TIT) IN WP NO. 246/2022 BETWEEN: M/S MAXIS INTERNATIONAL SDN BHD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF MALAYSIA, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT MENARA MAXIS, KUALA LUMPUR CITY CENTRE, 50088, KUALA LUMPUR PO BOX 13447 50810 KUALA LUMPUR REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTIVE MR. NORMAN WAYNE TREEBY SON OF NORMAN RONALD TREEBY AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS HAVING TITS OFFICE AT MENARA MAXIS KUALA LUMPUR CITY CENTRE 50088 KUALA LUMPUR CITY CENTRE 50088 KUALA LUMPUR PO BOX 13447 50810 KUALA LUMPUR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI KAMAL SAWHNEY, ADVOCATE A/W. SRI. MOHAMMED SHAKEEB M MULLA.,ADVOCATE) AND: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BMTC BUILDING 80 FT ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 28.3.2017 ANNEXURE-A AND ALL CONSEQUENT ORDERS AS BEING VOID AND INVALID; QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12.12.2018 ANNEXURE-B AS BEING VOID. IN WP NO. 250/2022 BETWEEN: MAXIS INTERNATIONAL SDN BHD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF MALAYSIA HAVING ITS OFFICE AT MENARA MAXIS KUALA LUMPUR CITY CENTRE, 50088, KUALA LUMPUR PO BOX 13447 50810 KUALA LUMPUR REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTIVE MR. NORMAN WAYNE TREEBY SON OF NORMAN RONALD TREEBY AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS HAVING TITS OFFICE AT MENARA MAXIS KUALA LUMPUR CITY CENTRE 50088 KUALA LUMPUR CITY CENTRE 50088 KUALA LUMPUR PO BOX 13447 50810 KUALA LUMPUR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI KAMAL SAWHNEY, ADVOCATE A/W. SRI. MOHAMMED SHAKEEB M MULLA.,ADVOCATE) AND: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BMTC BUILDING 80 FT ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 29.3.2016 ANNEXURE-A AND ALL CONSEQUENT ORDERS AS BEING VOID AND INVALID; QUASH THE IMPUGNED REASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 19.12.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND IMPUGNED PENALTY ORDER DATED 27.06.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND IMPUGNED PENALTY ORDER DATED 27.06.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AS BEING VOID FOR BEING TIME BARRED. IN WP NO. 287/2022 BETWEEN: M/S MAXIS INTERNATIONAL SDN BHD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF MALAYSIA HAVING ITS OFFICE AT MENARA MAXIS, KUALA LUMPUR CITY CENTRE, 50088, KUALA LUMPUR PO BOX 13447 50810 KUALA LUMPUR. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTIVE MR. NORMAN WAYNE TREEBY SON OF NORMAN RONALD TREEBY AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS HAVING TITS OFFICE AT MENARA MAXIS KUALA LUMPUR CITY CENTRE 50088 KUALA LUMPUR CITY CENTRE 50088 KUALA LUMPUR PO BOX 13447 50810 KUALA LUMPUR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI KAMAL SAWHNEY, ADVOCATE A/W. SRI. MOHAMMED SHAKEEB M MULLA.,ADVOCATE) AND: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BMTC BUILDING 80 FT ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 30.3.2018 ANNEXURE-A AND ALL CONSEQUENT ORDERS AS BEING VOID AND INVALID; QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 26.12.2019 ANNEXURE-B AS BEING VOID. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER …PETITIONER (BY SRI KAMAL SAWHNEY, ADVOCATE A/W. SRI. MOHAMMED SHAKEEB M MULLA.,ADVOCATE) AND: DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BMTC BUILDING 80 FT ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560095. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DILIP M.,ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 30.3.2018 ANNEXURE-A AND ALL CONSEQUENT ORDERS AS BEING VOID AND INVALID; QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 26.12.2019 ANNEXURE-B AS BEING VOID. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The question for consideration in these writ petitions would be whether they 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 WP No.51999/2019 connected with WP No.53137/2008 and in WP No.5867/2022 and connected matters in the light of such decision. Sri Kamal Sawhney, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, and Sri M.Dilip, the learned counsel for the respondents, are heard for final disposal. It remains undisputed that the petitioners, who are the recipients 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 Kamal Sawhney, 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 petitioners must be reserved liberty to seek revival of these petitions if these petitions stand 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 petitions must stand disposed of quashing the impugned assessment orders as also the penalty orders but with liberty to the petitioners to seek revival of these petitions 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 petitions stand disposed of. SD/- JUDGE AN/-