DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, AJMER, AJMER vs. AVADHESH PAREEK, AJMER

ITA 1904/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 September 2026AY 2019-205 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The Revenue has appealed the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 27.10.2025, which was passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The NFAC had allowed the assessee's appeal, holding that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act was invalid because it was issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). The NFAC relied on the Rajasthan High Court's decision in the assessee's own case (Avadhesh Pareek Vs. DC/ACIT, DB Civil Writ Petition No.15594/2023 dated 18.04.2023) to quash the Section 148 notice and set aside the assessment proceedings. The Revenue contends that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has since set aside the Rajasthan High Court's order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the Ld. CIT(A) had decided the issue solely on the basis of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court's decision. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of ITO Vs. Tej Partap Singh and others, has set aside the order passed by the Jurisdictional High Court and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, directing the High Court to pass an order by 30.09.2026. The Supreme Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the controversy, including the validity, scope, effect, retrospectivity, or applicability of amended provisions, leaving all such questions open for the High Courts to decide. Given that the Ld. CIT(A) had not decided the issue on merits and the basis of its decision (the High Court order) has been set aside, the Tribunal found it fit to restore the issue back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh after the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court as directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in quashing reassessment proceedings solely based on the Rajasthan High Court's order, which is under challenge before the Supreme Court and is sub-judice? 2. Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding the Section 148 notice issued by the JAO as invalid, disregarding the concurrent and exclusive jurisdiction of the JAO and High Court precedents upholding such jurisdiction? 3. Whether, on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the merits of the disallowance of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 2,50,000/- under Section 80GGC, despite evidence of a bogus political donation scam, incriminating material seized during a search, statements, digital evidence, and specific identification of the assessee as a beneficiary of accommodation entries totaling ₹3,00,000/-? Assessee's contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's contentions: The Ld. CIT(A) erred in quashing reassessment proceedings based on a High Court order that is now challenged before the Supreme Court. The Ld. CIT(A) also erred in holding the Section 148 notice issued by the JAO as invalid, ignoring the JAO's jurisdiction and High Court decisions. Furthermore, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to adjudicate the disallowance on merits despite substantial evidence of income escapement. The Revenue relies on the Supreme Court's decision in ITO Vs. Tej Partap Singh and others.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 148,Section 147A,Section 132,Section 131(1A),Section 80GGC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR

Hearing: 28.09.2026Pronounced: 30.09.2026

Per Annapurna Gupta, AM:- The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 27.10.2025 under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

P a g e | 2 Avadhesh Pareek

2.

The grounds raised by the Revenue read as under:-

1.

Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in quashing the reassessment proceedings merely on the basis of the order of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in Writ Petition No. 15594/2023 dated 01.09.2025, without appreciating that the Hon'ble High C

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 148

All 34,599 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →