Case Law Details
Metroark Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (Calcutta High Court)
In the recent case of Metroark Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer (ITO), a writ petition was filed in the Calcutta High Court seeking relief and direction upon the Chairman of the Central Board of Taxes (CBDT). The petition aimed to compel the CBDT to consider and dispose of an application for condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, related to the filing of Form-10-IC, in conjunction with Section 115BAA. The petitioner also requested a stay of demand for the relevant assessment year pending the decision on their application.
The High Court heard arguments from both parties and issued a judgment in this matter.
Detailed Analysis:
The petitioner, Metroark Pvt. Ltd., had submitted an application for condonation of delay along with a request for a stay of demand on December 6, 2022. This application pertained to the assessment year 2021-2022. The core issue revolved around the delay in filing Form-10-IC, which is governed by Section 115BAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The Calcutta High Court considered the facts and circumstances of the case, taking into account the submissions made by both the petitioner and the respondents. In its judgment, the Court directed the Chairman of the CBDT to review and process the petitioner’s application for condonation of delay in accordance with the law.
Furthermore, the Court specified that a reasoned and speaking order must be issued by the CBDT, affording the petitioner or its authorized representatives an opportunity to be heard. The Court set a timeline for this process, instructing the CBDT to complete its review and issue a decision within six weeks from the date of communication of the Court’s order.
Additionally, the assessing officer (respondent no.1) was directed to consider and adjudicate on the petitioner’s application for stay of demand. Similar to the CBDT’s directive, the assessing officer was instructed to provide a reasoned and speaking order in compliance with the law and to grant the petitioner or its authorized representatives an opportunity to present their case. The assessing officer was given a timeline of eight weeks from the date of communication of the Court’s order to complete this process.
Conclusion:
In the Metroark Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO case, the Calcutta High Court issued a significant judgment. It directed the CBDT to consider the application for condonation of delay related to Form-10-IC and Section 115BAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court emphasized that a reasoned and speaking order must be issued, and the petitioner should be given an opportunity to present their case.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties.
Petitioner has filed this writ petition for relief of direction upon the Chairman, Central Board of Taxes/ respondent no.3 to consider and dispose of its application for condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in filing Form-10-IC read with Section 115BAA, of the Act relating to assessment year 2021-2022, which has been filed on 6th December, 2022 being Annexure P-6 to the writ petition and also prays for stay of demand for the aforesaid relevant assessment year till the disposal of such application by the Board. It appears from record that petitioner has made an application for stay of demand before the assessing officer concerned on 6th December, 2022 being Annexure P-7 to the writ petition.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and submission of the parties, this writ petition being WPA 4471 of 2023 is disposed of by directing the Chairman, CBDT, to consider and dispose of the aforesaid application of the petitioner dated 6th December, 2022, in accordance with law and by passing a reasoned and speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorised representatives, within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order.
The assessing officer concerned/respondent no.1 is directed to consider and dispose of the application of the petitioner dated 6th December, 2022, for stay of demand in question by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or its authorised representatives, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order
With this observation, this writ petition being WPA 4471 of 2023 stands disposed of.
Author Bio
dear sir
it would be of great value to know the outcome of the case by CBDT whether did CBDT condone or not