Full Judgment Text
2022:DHC:2426-DB
$~21
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 7546/2022
P C FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Arvind Nayar, Sr.Advocate with
Mr.Ajay Bhargava, Ms.Vanita
Bhargava, Mr.Atul Pandey, Mr.Hirak
Mukhopadhyay and Mr.Milind Jain,
Advocates.
versus
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV.) - 8 (2) AND ORS.
..... Respondents
Through: Ms.Vibhooti Malhotra, Sr.Standing
Counsel with Mr.Shailendera Singh,
Jr.Standing Counsel and Mr.Ekansh
Dubey, Advocate.
th
% Date of Decision: 04 July, 2022
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
J U D G M E N T
MANMOHAN, J (Oral):
CM APPL.27995/2022
1. Present application has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner seeking
st
modification of the order dated 31 May, 2022 passed by this Court by
st
relying on the order dated 31 May, 2022 passed by a learned Single Judge
of this Court in W.P.(C) 8514/2022, directing the Directorate of
Enforcement to release a further amount of Rs. 25 crores in favour of the
W.P.(C) No.7546/2022 Page 1 of 3
2022:DHC:2426-DB
Petitioner to meet its essential expenditure as well as towards salaries of
employees.
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the Respondents submits that the
th
present application is unsustainable, as the orders dated 17 December, 2021
assailed in the present petition issued under Section 132(9B) of the Income
th
Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) have expired on 17 June, 2022 due to operation
th
of law. She states that since the subsequent orders dated 16 June, 2022
under Section 281B of the Act passed by the Assessing Officer, being ACIT,
Central Circle-25, New Delhi have neither been challenged nor the
Assessing officer has been impleaded, as a respondent, the present
proceedings are infructuous.
3. Learned counsel for the Respondents further states that no amount has
been released by the Directorate of Enforcement in pursuance to the order
st
dated 31 May, 2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C)
8514/2022.
4. She also states that an application has been filed by the Enforcement
Directorate before the Supreme Court in SLP(C) 7551/2022 assailing the
Petitioner’s conduct of approaching the learned Single Judge of this Court in
W.P.(C) 8514/2022 even when the Supreme Court is seized of the
controversy, on the ground of ‘forum shopping’.
5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner seriously refutes the
contention of ‘forum shopping’. He states that WP(C) 8514/2022 had been
filed as it pertains to a different cause of action. He, however, admits that in
th
view of the subsequent orders dated 16 June, 2022 under Section 281B of
the Act passed by the Assessing Officer, being ACIT, Central Circle-25,
New Delhi, the petitioner would need to file a fresh writ petition.
W.P.(C) No.7546/2022 Page 2 of 3
2022:DHC:2426-DB
th
6. This Court is of the view that as the impugned orders dated 17
th
December, 2021 have expired on 17 June, 2022 due to operation of law,
the present writ petition is infructuous.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition along with application is
disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh proceeding in
th
accordance with law to challenge the orders dated 16 June, 2022 passed
under Section 281B of the Act. It is clarified that this Court has not
expressed any opinion on the merits of the controversy. The rights and
contentions of all the parties are left open.
8. The next date of hearing is cancelled.
MANMOHAN, J
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
JULY 4, 2022
TS
W.P.(C) No.7546/2022 Page 3 of 3