2023 (6) TMI 741

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....amnal and Mr. Yasharth Shukla, Advocates for R-2/UOI. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL): CM No. 29565/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 7622/2023 & CM No. 29564/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief] 2. Issue notice. 2.1 Mr Puneet Rai, learned senior standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue. 3. Given the direction(s) that we propose to issue, Mr Rai says that he does not wish to file a counter-affidavit, and that he will argue the matter based on the record presently available with the Court. 3.1 Therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing and final disposal at this stage itself. 4. This is the second r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en India and Mauritius. 9. It was pointed out by Ms. Fereshte D. Sethna, who appears on behalf of the petitioner [as was the case in first round], that the petitioner had, in fact, registered a loss concerning the said transaction amounting to Rs. 28,73,49,89,247/-. 10. It is in these circumstances, based on the stand taken by counsel for the parties, that via the judgment dated 08.12.2022, we had set aside the order and notice, which was subject matter of the challenge in the first round, and remitted the matter to the AO. 11. More particularly, via judgment dated 08.12.2022, we had called upon the AO to examine, as to whether she had jurisdiction in the matter, having regard to the objections raised by the petitioner in the writ petiti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oner, which would persuade us to conclude that the TRC issued to the petitioner was a not viable document in law. 16. The observations made in paragraph 3.2, to say the least are, if at all, tentative. The AO has attributed an intent to the assessee- which is that it would indulge in tax evasion inter alia, by treaty shopping, without any material or information of such kind being put to it. 17. We are of the view, that unless relevant information, if any, which is available with the AO, is put to the petitioner, which leads to a conclusion that the TRC obtained by the petitioner is not legally valid and/or viable, the impugned order passed by the AO cannot be sustained. 17.1 Therefore, without expressing any final view in the matter, in....