2024:BHC-AS:12456-DB
1/3 447-aswp-5134-2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5134 OF 2022
Rajendra Lilachand Sanghavi …Petitioner
Versus
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2,
Pune & Ors. …Respondents
Mr. Mihir Naniwadekar, with Mr. Rohan Deshpande, i/b. Ms.
Farzeen Khambatta, for Petitioner.
Mr. Suresh Kumar, for Respondent-Revenue.
CORAM: K. R. SHRIRAM &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATED: 12th March, 2024
PC:-
1. Petitioner had filed return of income (“ROI”) on 27th March
2018 for Assessment Year 2017-18 declaring an income of
Rs.8,36,800/-. Petitioner had received notice dated 31 st March 2021
under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). According
to the reason for reopening the assessment, the total tax liability of
Rs.26,05,390/- was payable on declared income of Rs.57,89,755/- in
the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 (“IDS”). Petitioner was called
to discharge the total liability by 31 st January 2020. Petitioner paid
only Rs.2,40,000/- on 22nd March 2018 and, therefore, Petitioner was
called upon to pay the balance amount of Rs.23,56,390/-.
2. It is Petitioner’s case that if the advance tax and self assessment
tax that Petitioner had paid for AY 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15
Shivgan
2/3 447-aswp-5134-2022.doc
together with the payments made for AY 2017-18 under the IDS are
considered, Petitioner would have paid a total amount of
Rs.26,74,784/- which was in excess of the liability determined under
the IDS. Petitioner was informed that advance tax and self
assessment tax paid by Petitioner could not be adjusted against the
liability under the IDS. Therefore, this Petition was filed.
3. An affidavit in reply of one Aparna M Aggarwal, Principal
Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Pune, affirmed on 5 th May 2022 is
filed. In the said affidavit, Respondents have agreed to give credit to
a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- that Petitioner had paid as advance tax. With
regard to self assessment tax of Rs.15,78,210/- paid for AY 2013-14,
it is stated that the legal opinion of the standing counsel has been
sought in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Kumudam
Publications (P) Ltd. v. Central Board of Direct Taxation 1 and since it
was a policy matter and opinion is yet to be received, input from the
CBDT is also being sought. One thing is clear that Respondents are
not averse to giving credit for the self assessment tax, but they
wanted somebody to tell them to go ahead and give credit. In our
view, credit for the self assessment tax of Rs.15,78,210/- paid for AY
2013-14 has to be given. Mr. Suresh Kumar states, his information is
that the Board has expressed an opinion that credit for self
assessment tax paid cannot be given. In our view, any amount paid by
1 (2017) 393 ITR 599.
Shivgan
3/3 447-aswp-5134-2022.doc
Petitioner for those relevant Assessment Years, credit has to be given
and we find support for this view in judgments of this Court in Kamla
Chandra Singh Kabali v. Prinicpal Commissioner of Income Tax-27 &
Ors.,2 and CEAT Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax.3
4. Therefore, the assessment order dated 31 st March 2022 has to
be quashed and set aside. Ordered accordingly. Consequently,
demand notice dated 31st March 2022 and penalty notice also dated
31st March 2022 are also quashed and set aside.
5. Respondents shall issue Form 4 under the IDS within four
weeks from today after giving credit to all amounts paid including
the advance tax and self assessment tax.
6. Petition disposed.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (K. R. SHRIRAM, J.)
2 2022 (137) taxmann.com 346 (Bombay).
Signed by: Raju D. Gaikwad 3 2024 SCC OnLine Bom. 557
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Shivgan
Date: 15/03/2024 12:52:20
