TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court allows Petitioner to file fresh proceeding challenging Income Tax Act orders. No opinion expressed on merits. Next hearing canceled.</h1> <h3>P.C. Financial Services Private Limited Versus Deputy Director Of Income Tax (Inv.) - 8 (2) And Ors.</h3> P.C. Financial Services Private Limited Versus Deputy Director Of Income Tax (Inv.) - 8 (2) And Ors. - TMI Issues:1. Modification of order dated 31st May, 20222. Validity of orders dated 17th December, 2021 under Section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act, 19613. Release of amount by Directorate of Enforcement4. Application filed by Enforcement Directorate before the Supreme Court in SLP(C) 7551/20225. Allegation of 'forum shopping' by the Petitioner6. Expiry of impugned orders dated 17th December, 20217. Disposal of the present writ petition with liberty to file a fresh proceedingAnalysis:1. The Petitioner filed an application seeking modification of the order dated 31st May, 2022, passed by a learned Single Judge of the Court, directing the Directorate of Enforcement to release an additional amount of Rs. 25 crores for essential expenses and employee salaries.2. The Respondents argued that the present application is unsustainable as the orders dated 17th December, 2021, challenged in the petition under Section 132(9B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, expired on 17th June, 2022, due to the operation of law. They highlighted that subsequent orders dated 16th June, 2022, under Section 281B of the Act by the Assessing Officer were not challenged, making the present proceedings irrelevant.3. The Respondents further mentioned that no amount had been released by the Directorate of Enforcement following the order dated 31st May, 2022, passed in a different case by a Single Judge of the Court.4. It was brought to light that the Enforcement Directorate had filed an application before the Supreme Court challenging the Petitioner's conduct of approaching the Single Judge of the Court despite the Supreme Court's involvement, citing 'forum shopping' as the reason.5. The Petitioner's senior counsel defended against the accusation of 'forum shopping,' stating that the previous petition was based on a different cause of action. However, acknowledging the subsequent orders under Section 281B of the Act, the counsel admitted the need for a fresh writ petition.6. The Court noted that the impugned orders dated 17th December, 2021, had expired by operation of law on 17th June, 2022, rendering the present writ petition ineffective.7. Consequently, the Court disposed of the present writ petition, allowing the Petitioner to file a fresh proceeding to challenge the orders dated 16th June, 2022, passed under Section 281B of the Act. The Court clarified that no opinion on the merits was expressed, leaving the rights and contentions of all parties open for future proceedings. The next hearing date was canceled.
TaxTMI 