Bombay High Court: In a petition challenging certain provisions of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (Black Money Act) as being ultra vires the Constitution of India, the Division Bench of B.P. Colabawalla and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla, JJ., directed that since the petitioner, Anil Ambani, had already appealed the assessment order, the said appeal can proceed and orders can be passed thereon, but no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner, including that of prosecution and penalty, till the hearing and final disposal of the present petition.
Background
The present writ petition challenges certain provisions of the Black Money Act as being ultra vires the Constitution of India.
The challenge arose from a show-cause notice issued to the petitioner under Sections 50 and 51, Black Money Act. According to the petitioner, the notice was founded upon an assessment order passed for the assessment year 2019-2020 by the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation), which was under challenge before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner contended that further proceedings pursuant to the show-cause notice were premature during the pendency of the appellate proceedings.
The petitioner further contended that the Black Money Act, having come into force in 2015, could not be applied retrospectively to transactions pertaining to the assessment years 2006 and 2010-2011 and relied upon Article 20 of the Constitution. It was also pointed out that similar issues concerning the Act were pending consideration before various High Courts.
Earlier Proceedings
At the preliminary stage, the Court granted time to the respondents to file their response and directed that they should not proceed further pursuant to the impugned show-cause notice until the next date of hearing.
Present Order
The Court noted that the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Black Money Act had been challenged in other writ petitions, in which interim relief had already been granted. Accordingly, the Court directed the respondents to file their affidavit in reply within 4 weeks.
As regards interim relief, the Court noted that an assessment order had already been passed and that the petitioner’s appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was pending. The Court permitted the appellate proceedings to continue and orders to be passed therein. However, it clarified that no coercive action, including prosecution and penalty, shall be taken against the petitioner till the hearing and final disposal of the writ petition.
The Court further directed that the present writ petition be heard along with the other pending writ petitions raising the same or similar issues concerning the Black Money Act.
[Anil Dhirajlal Ambani v. Union of India, WP No. 5321 of 2022, order dated 8-6-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the petitioner: Senior Advocate Prakash D. Shah a/w Mufaddal Paperwala, Prerana Wagh i/b M/s. Crawford Bayley & Co.
For the respondents: Akhileshwar Sharma, Advocate
