Bombay High Court
WP/1058/2023 of INDIRARAJE LAXMANSINGH BHONSLE Vs NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, INCOME TAX DEPT., NEW DELHI AND ORS on 16 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
(1) 910Awp1058.23 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.1058/2023 Indiraraje Laxmansingh Bhonsle .Vs. National E-assessment Centre, Ministry of Finance, Income Tax Department, New Delhi and Ors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Ram D.Heda, Mr. Vaiman Chatap and Ms Isha Shinde, Advocates for petitioner. Mr. Bhushan Mohata with Mr. Prateek D. Sharma, Advocates for respondent Nos. 1 to 5.
CORAM :
ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ. DATE : OCTOBER 16, 2026 Heard.
2. The only reason why the petitioner has invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India is that while passing the impugned order, the principles of natural justice were not adhered to. Record shows that on 06.12.2022 the petitioner applied for hearing by video conferencing. What transpired thereafter is not known to petitioner.
3. On this point, we have gone through the impugned order and requested the counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 to point out from the order or otherwise that the request made on 06.12.2022 was acted upon or that opportunity of hearing was given either on 06.12.2022 or on the date the impugned order was passed, which came to be passed on 21.12.2022. Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 could not show us from the order that the request made by the petitioner was acceded to or rejected. The order is completely silent as to whether opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner.
4. That being so, the order impugned is unsustainable. The writ petition is accordingly partly allowed. Impugned order dated 21.12.2022, is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to respondent No.3 for consideration afresh, in accordance with law.
5. The petition is disposed of in terms of the above. No order as to costs. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) Kahale Signed by: Kahale Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 16/10/2026 15:11:34