VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2011 › High Court of Delhi

Vodafone Essare Mobile Services Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
28 November 2011
Bench
Sanjiv Khannaauthor, R.V.Easwarp?
Case no.
W.P.(C) 1880/2011

Judgment

ORDER

28.11.2011%? Mr. N. Venkatraman, Sr. Advocate appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition, in which they want to challenge vires of the proviso to Section 201(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 inserted by the st April, 2010. He furtherFinance (No.2) Act, 2009 with effect from 1 submits that the petitioner should be permitted to raise grounds and contentions, which have been raised in the present writ petition. It is submitted that the constitutional validity of the proviso is required to Commissionerbe challenged in view of the decisions of this Court in Income Tax Vs. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation [2008] 305of Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. HutchisonITR 137 (Delhi) and Essar Telecome Ltd., [2010] 323 ITR 230 (Delhi). It is further prayed that the interim order passed by the Court directing that no coercive steps shall be taken may be continued for a period of 15 days to enable the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition. We have heard the statement made by the learned senior counsel. The prayer for withdrawal is accepted and the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is directed that the respondent will not take coercive steps to recover the impugned? E the period mentioned in the writ petitiondemand, if any, pertaining to . for a period of 15 days from today.

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

R.V.EAS WAR, J. NOVEMBER 28, 2011 NA #'I

Case details

Parties and counsel

$30, 31 & 32* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +?W.P.(C)Nos. 1879/2011, 1880/2011 & 1882/2011 VODAFONE ESSARE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED.....Petitioner Mr. N. Venkatraman, Sr. Adv.Through? with Ms. Sonia Mathur, Adv. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR .....Respondent Through Mr.Abhishekh Maratha, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Anshul Sharma, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWARp?

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.