ICICI BANK LTD vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(3)(1) AND ANR

Judgment text excerpt

Digitally signed by Revati 2.WP.1172.22.docx SAYYED SAYYED SAEED SAEED AHMED ALI ALI ALI AHMED Date: ALI 2025.02.12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 16:57:26 +0530 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1172 OF 2022 ICICI Bank Ltd. ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai-400051 ...Petitioner Versus 1. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-2(3)(1) having his office at Room No.552, Aayakar Bhavan, M.Karve Road, Mumbai-400020 2. Union of India through Ministry of Law Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020 ...Respondents _____________________________________________________ Ms. Aarti Vissanji a/w Mr. S.J.Mehta for Petitioner. Mr. Abhishek Mishra for Respondents. _____________________________________________________ CORAM : M. S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ. DATED : 11 February 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Jitendra Jain, J.):- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. 3. This petition challenges notice under Section 148 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) issued by the respondent No.1 for the assessment year 2014 -15. 4. The reasons for re-opening were furnished to the petitioner on 25 November 2011 and the same reads as under :- Page 1 of 7 Revati 2.WP.1172.22.docx Page 2 of 7 Revati 2.WP.1172.22.docx Page 3 of 7 Revati 2.WP.1172.22.docx Page 4 of 7 Revati 2.WP.1172.22.docx 5. Ms. Vissanji, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice is issued after a period of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year and in the absence of any allegation of any failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment, impugned notice