Wp/486/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai v. Vodafone India Services Private Ltd., And Another

kambli 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J. WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 56 OF 2014 ... Commissioner of Income Tax3 ...Petitioner v/s.Vodafone India Services Pvt.Ltd. & anr. ...Respondents … Mr.Kevic Setalvad, Addl.Solicitor General with Mr.B.M.Chaterjee Mr.Abhay Ahuja for the petitioner.Mr.Harish Salve with Ms.Anuradha Dutt,Ms. Fereshte Sethna with Mr.Chirag Dave, Mr. Ram Kakkar, Mr. Aagam Doshi i/b. Dutt Menon Dunmorr Sett for respondent No.1..Mr.Pradeep S. Jetly and Ms.Bhardwaj for respondent No.2. ... CORAM:MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & M.S.SANKLECHA, J.DATE :6 FEBRUARY 2014 P.C.: At the request of the learned counsel, this petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission. 2.This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against interlocutory order dated 27 December 2013 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (Tribunal). 3.The Tribunal has by the impugned order dated 27 December 2013granted interim stay for a period of six months or the disposal of the assessee's appeal, whichever is earlier on following conditions:- (a) payment of Rs. 200 crores in two equal instalments on or before 15 January 2014 and 15 February 2014; kambli (b) furnishing of corporate guarantee for the balance demand of Rs.3583.49 crores to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer by the assessee by 15-2-2014; The impugned order has also fixed the final hearing of the assessee's appeal on 19 March 2014. 4.We are informed that the respondents have already paid an amount of Rs.200 crores to the revenue as directed by the Tribunal. 5.It appears that during pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner-revenue has also moved Misc.Application No.17/N/2014 before the Tribunal. By the above application the petitioner-revenue seeks a recall of the impugned order dated 27 December 2013 for rectification of the apparent errors of facts therein and to expunge certain remarks and modify the order. 6. We are informed that hearing of the above application is now fixed on 21 February 2014. However, the learnedAdditional Solicitor General informs us that the same will not be pressed but seeks expunging of certain observations in the impugned order. Our attention is invited to the following remarks in para 3 of the impugned order dated 27 December 2013:- “We would however and again as observed during the hearing itself, have definitely preferred a more informed and studied response from the Revenue, considering the volume of the demand involved.” kambli 3wpl-56-14 7.Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we expunge this remark from the impugned order dated 27 December 2013 and the same shall be deleted from the original order of the Tribunal. 8.When the matter is called out for hearing, it was suggested to the learned counsel for parties that since the hearing of this writ petition would require going into merits of controversy, it would be much better that final hearing of the appeal before the Tribunal itself is preponed to 21 February 2014. 9.Mr.Kevic Setalwad, learned Addl.Solicitor General and Mr.Harish Salve, learned senior counsel for the respondent-assessee both have positively responded to the said suggestion and have agreed that they will proceed to argue the matter for final hearing of the appeal before the Tribunal on 21 February 2014 itself and neither side would pray for adjournment for any reason whatsoever. 10.In view of the above, we direct that the Tribunal shall take up the appeal of the respondent- assessee on 21 February 2014 itself without taking up the rectification application for hearing, which learned Addl.Solicitor General agrees to withdraw. 11.The appeal shall be heard as far as possible on day to day basis and the Tribunal shall endeavour to finally decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible and preferably by 15 March 2014. kambli 10.In view of the above, we direct that the Tribunal shall take up the appeal of the respondent- assessee on 21 February 2014 itself without taking up the rectification application for hearing, which learned Addl.Solicitor General agrees to withdraw. 11.The appeal shall be heard as far as possible on day to day basis and the Tribunal shall endeavour to finally decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible and preferably by 15 March 2014. kambli 12.The observations made by the Tribunal in the impugned order dated 27 December 2013 were in the context of the stay application and would be so understood. Therefore the Tribunal will decide the appeal finally in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observations made in the impugned order on the stay application. 13.It is clarified that we have not at all heard the learned counsel on merits of the controversy either on the lis between the parties before the Tribunal or on the subject matter of this petition. 14.Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of in the aforesaid terms. CHIEF JUSTICE (M.S.SANKLECHA, J.)