Bombay High Court (Maharashtra And Goa) Weekly Roundup: February 28 To March 6, 2022

NOMINAL INDEX Shashikala Surendra Ambade & Ors. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors Dr Anand Teltumbde vs National Investigation Agency Pavan Morarka Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – 2(3), Mumbai Yohan Tengra vs State of Maharashtra Larsen & Toubro Limited Versus Girish Dave, Director of Income-tax (International Taxation) HDFC Bank Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax-2(3) Tata Capital Financial Services Limited Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(3)(1) and Ors. Jawahar Hiralal Mehta v. The State of Maharashtra Shalaka Infra-Tech India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Versus The Union of India & Ors Rashtriya Shikshan Sangh and others vs State of Maharashtra Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Indofil Industries Limited Vivek Mehta & Anr. v/s. KaRRs Designs & Developments & Ors. Ravindra Hemraj Dhangekar V/S Ganesh Madhukar Bidkar & Ors.ROUND UP 1. Bombay High Court Pulls Up District Officials For Destroying Farmers' Crops For Mahashivratri Celebrations Case Title: Shashikala Surendra Ambade & Ors. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 56 The Bombay High Court, restrained local State and Civic body officials in Kolhapur district from using any part of the field of a farmer for the festival of Mahashivratri on which the farmer had grown soyabean crop. The authorities submitted that an entry in the petitioner's land records (7/12 extract) endorsed that during the Mahashivratri festival, the authorities would take possession of the petitioners' land for a period of 15 days for the festivities. "We do not understand under which provision of law, such an endorsement is made/allowed and how the plot of the petitioners can be taken away for a period of 15 days especially when the petitioners are growing soyabean crop on the said field. Even if this practice has been adopted in the past, the same cannot be relied upon as a precedent and the Court is required to stop such practice once it is opposed by the petitioners," the court order noted. 2. Bhima Koregaon: Bombay High Court Allows Anand Teltumbde To Visit Nonagenarian Mother For 2 Days Following Brother's Death In An Encounter, Directed to Spend Night in Custody Case Title: Dr Anand Teltumbde vs National Investigation Agency Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 57 Three months after his brother's demise in an encounter, the Bombay High Court permitted Dalit scholar Anand Teltumbde to meet his nonagenarian mother in Chandrapur on March 8 and 9, 2022 under escort protection. The court partly allowed the application and directed Teltumbde to be taken to Chandrapur by police escorts by the afternoon of March 8, 2022. However, he has not been permitted to spend the night at home and will be taken in custody in the closest prison. 3. Reopening Of Income Tax Assessment Can't Be Allowed On Grounds Of Future Contingencies: Bombay High Court Case Title: Pavan Morarka Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – 2(3), Mumbai Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 58 The Bombay High Court held that the reopening of Income Tax Assessment cannot be allowed on grounds of future contingencies. The division bench noted that the entire exercise of reassessment is only contingent on a future event and a consequence that may endure upon the decision of the Tribunal, that again if the Tribunal were to hold against the Revenue. A reopening of an assessment under Section 148 cannot be justified on such a basis. There has to be a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. 4. Despite High Court Nudge, Maharashtra Govt Refuses To Withdraw Restrictions On Unvaccinated Using Local Trains Case Title:Yohan Tengra vs State of Maharashtra Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 59 The Bombay High Court disposed of two PILs after the Maharashtra government said that it won't withdraw restrictions imposed on individuals on the basis of their vaccination status from boarding local trains, visiting malls or places of employment. "In our order dated February 22, we have observed that the state, in previously issuing orders restricting travel by public transport, had imposed restrictions in a manner which had no sanction of... Having regard to gross violations in imposing restrictions since August 10, 2021, it would have been better for us to strike down the further orders passed by the state government…However, we had reposed hope and trust that SEC would take a decision which is reasonable and not in derogation of fundamental rights of citizens protected by article 19 (1) (d). We are mistaken." 5. Payments Towards Charter Hire Of Tugs, Barges Made To Non-Resident Assessee Assessable U/S 44BB: Bombay High Court Case Title: Larsen & Toubro Limited Versus Girish Dave, Director of Income-tax (International Taxation) Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 60 The Bombay High Court held...

Bombay High Court (Maharashtra And Goa) Weekly Roundup: February 28 To March 6, 2022

Sharmeen Hakim

Tags