Vodafone – Bombay HC writ under Article 226

Share this:

The Bombay HC dismissing the Vodafone plea has held as follows: 

  1. Article 226 gives limited jurisdiction to intervene after an order is passed by a TP officer.
  2. DRP has wide powers to go into international transactions. Further the tax payer’s right to challenge an assessment order (before DRP) is for challenging the entire order and not portions of order.
  3. The TP officer cannot determine whether a particular transaction is an international transaction or not. He can merely determine the arms length price.
  4. Vodafone had obtained a stay restraining the Department from serving the order.  To that, the HC has extended the stay period to 12 weeks to enable Vodafone to approach the SC

The HC, considering Vodafone facts, has come to the conclusion that an alternate remedy to file an appeal with the Tribunal and/ or pursue with DRP is available under the Income tax law and hence, writ petition will not be entertained. In coming to the conclusion, it has held that once an order is passed by a TP officer, alternate remedy available under the  administrative law has to be resorted to.

Share this:
A Budget of Aspirations
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x