Digitally

2024:BHC-OS:7104-DB signed by GAURI GAURI AMIT AMIT GAEKWAD 1/87 904.WP-1778-2023.doc GAEKWAD Date:

2024.05.03

1 3:09:50 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1778 OF 2023 Hexaware Technologies Limited, ) Building No.152, Millennium Business Park, ) Sector – 3, A Block, Mhape, Navi Mumbai, )

Thane – 400 710 ) ….Petitioner V/s.

1. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, ) Circle 15(1)(2), Mumbai, Room No.483A, ) 4th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve ) Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ) 2. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, ) Mumbai – 6, Mumbai, Room No.501, ) 5th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve ) Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ) 3. Principal Chief Commissioner of Income ) Tax, Room No.321, 3rd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, ) Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ) 4. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department ) of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, ) Secretariat Building, New Delhi – 110 001 ) 5. Union of India, Through Joint Secretary & ) Legal Adviser, Branch Secretariat, Department ) of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice, ) 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, New )

Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 020 ) ….Respondents ----

Mr. J.D. Mistri, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Madhur Agrawal i/b. Mr. Atul K.

Jasani for petitioner.

Ms. Swapna Gokhale a/w. Mr. Suresh Kumar, Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma, Ms. Samiksha Kanani and Ms. Dhanalaxmi Iyer for respondents - Revenue.

----

CORAM : K. R. SHRIRAM &

DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.

RESERVED ON : 16th APRIL 2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 3rd MAY 2024 JUDGMENT (PER K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) :

1 Since the pleadings are completed, by consent of the parties, we decided to dispose the petition at the admission stage itself.

2 Therefore, Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

3 Petitioner is engaged in information technology consulting, software development and business process services. Respondent no.1 is the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) of petitioner, respondent no.2 is the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, respondent no.3 is the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, respondent no.4 is the Central Board of Direct Taxes and respondent no.5 is the Union of India.

4 Petitioner filed return of income for Assessment Year 2015- 2016 on 28th November 2015 declaring total income of Rs.204,54,44,990/-. In the return of income, petitioner claimed deduction under Section 10AA of the Act of Rs.195,94,62,306/- and also claimed deduction under Section 80JJAA of the Act of Rs.6,54,04,038/-. For claiming such deductions, petitioner filed an audit report in Form No.56F and Form No.10DA. Further, the details of deduction claimed under Section 10AA and 80JJAA of the Act was also reported in the Tax Audit report in Form 3CB read with Form 3CD which was submitted to respondent no.1 also during the course of assessment proceedings.

5 Petitioner’s case was selected for scrutiny and notice dated 17th June 2016 under Section 143(2) of the Act came to be issued. Respondent no.1 also issued a notice dated 22nd August 2017 under Section

142(1) of the Act. This was followed by another notice dated 5th October 2017 calling upon petitioner to file details of deduction claimed under Chapter VIA alongwith all supporting documents. By its letter dated 13th November 2017 petitioner submitted details of deduction claimed under Chapter VIA of the Act alongwith all supporting documents. Petitioner further filed computation of income and provided reference to disclosures in Form 3CD with respect to the deductions claimed by petitioner. Further submissions were filed during the assessment proceedings. Respondent no.1, thereafter passed an assessment order dated 30th November 2017 under Section 143(3) of the Act accepting the return of income filed by petitioner.

6 Almost 3 ½ years later, respondent no.1 issued a notice dated 8th April 2021 under Section 148 of the Act stating that he had reason to believe that income chargeable to tax for Assessment Year 2