Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Al Sudais Haj And Umrah Service Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)
Appeal Number : W.P.(C) 2588/2021
Date of Judgement/Order : 30/01/2023
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Al Sudais Haj And Umrah Service Vs Union Of India & Anr (Delhi High Court)

Delhi High Court held that debarment of Haj Group Operator (HGO) was based on Income Tax Return which was later on rectified. Accordingly, unsustainable order of blacklisting would not operate so as to render the petitioner disqualified in case it was to apply for enlistment as an HGO in the future years.

Facts- The petitioner is essentially aggrieved by the order of 27 January 2021 passed by the first respondent debarring it from applying for being enlisted as a Haj Group Operator for a period of five years together with the forfeiture of the security deposit of Rs.25 lakhs.

Conclusion- The Court finds that the petitioner was visited with the maximum punishment and imposed the most onerous of penalties which were contemplated under the Policy without the assignment of any reason why the harshest of penalties was warranted. The authorities, in fact, appear to have acted solely on the basis of the recommendations of the Apex Committee. As was noticed in the preceding parts of this decision, the first respondent had originally neither imposed nor contemplated the imposition of the penalty of debarment and forfeiture of security. The Apex Committee, as has been held above, had no authority to either impose such a penalty or make a recommendation in that regard while dealing with a representation for redressal of grievances.

The inaccuracy as evident upon a perusal of the ITR which was filed came to be duly rectified by the Income Tax Department and the mistake that had occurred during the course of filing was ultimately corrected. While the rectification which apparently came to be granted after the rejection of the application of the petitioner may have had no bearing on the validity of the decision taken by the first respondent to reject the application of the petitioner, it was clearly a circumstance which had relevance insofar as the proposed action of blacklisting and forfeiture was concerned.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031