GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, 7(1)(1), Mumbai And Anr - 2017-LL-0329-144

Citation	2017-LL-0329-144
Appellant Name	GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals Limited
Respondent Name	Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, 7(1)(1), Mumbai And Anr.
Court	HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	29/03/2017
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	stock broking
Bot Summary:	The impugned order was preceded by an earlier order dated 26 December 2016. Both the impugned order as well as the order dated 26 December 2016 have been passed pursuant/consequent to the order dated 30 October 2015 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Assessing Officer could not have passed the impugned order dated 30 December 2016 on the same issue after having disposed it of by order dated 26 December 2016. It is submitted that after passing of the order dated 26 December 2016 the Assessing Officer has become functus officio. Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel for the Respondent Revenue, on instructions of Mr. H.S. Sundeepkumar, ACIT, Circle 7(1)(1), Mumbai, states that the impugned order dated 30 December 2016 is withdrawn by the Assessing Officer. Mr. Suresh Kumar seeks liberty to take such proceedings in respect of the order dated 26 December 2016 as are available to the Respondent Revenue in law. In view of the withdrawal of the impugned order dated 30 December 2016, nothing survives in the petition.

wp218-17.doc sg IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.218 OF 2017 GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals Limited .. Petitioner V/s. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 7(1)(1), Mumbai And Anr. .. Respondents. Mr. Percy Pardiwala, Senior Counsel, a/w. Mr. Niraj Sheth, i/b. Atul Jasani, for Petitioner. Mr. Suresh Kumar, for Respondents. CORAM: M.S.SANKLECHA, & S.C. GUPTE, JJ. DATE : 29 MARCH, 2017. P.C.: . This petition challenges order dated 30 December 2016 passed by Assessing Officer under Section 143 (3) read with Section 254 of Income Tax Act, 1961 ( Act). 2. impugned order was preceded by earlier order dated 26 December 2016. Both impugned order as well as order dated 26 December 2016 have been passed pursuant/consequent to order dated 30 October 2015 by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. grievance of Petitioner is that Assessing Officer could not have passed impugned order dated 30 December 2016 on same issue after having disposed it of by order dated 26 December 2016. It is submitted that after passing of order dated 26 December 2016 Assessing Officer has become functus officio. In support reliance is placed 1 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 03/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2017 09:17:16 ::: wp218-17.doc upon decision of this Court in Classic Share & Stock Broking Services Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (W.P. No.343 of 2012) dated 7 March 2013. 3. Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel for Respondent Revenue, on instructions of Mr. H.S. Sundeepkumar, ACIT, Circle 7(1)(1), Mumbai, states that impugned order dated 30 December 2016 is withdrawn by Assessing Officer. However, Mr. Suresh Kumar seeks liberty to take such proceedings in respect of order dated 26 December 2016 as are available to Respondent Revenue in law. Liberty as prayed for granted. 4. In view of withdrawal of impugned order dated 30 December 2016, nothing survives in petition. 5. Accordingly, petition is disposed of in above terms. No order as to costs. (S.C. GUPTE,J.) (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.) 2 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 03/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2017 09:17:16 ::: GlaxoSmithKlinePharmaceuticalsLimited v. AssistantCommissionerofIncome-tax,7(1)(1),MumbaiAndAnr

Metadata

Judgment