GURVINDERJEET SINGH OBEROI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RAIPUR-1

PDF · subscribers
WPT/206/2023HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01025094202323 June 2026Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY3 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court considered the submissions made by both parties. The revenue pointed out the availability of an efficacious alternative remedy for the petitioner, which is to file appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as per Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the writ petitions with the liberty to approach the appellate authority. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petitions as withdrawn. The Court granted the petitioner 30 days to prefer appeals before the appellate authority. It further directed that if such appeals are filed, the appellate authority shall decide them expeditiously after providing an opportunity of hearing to both parties. No specific findings were made on the merits of the reassessment proceedings themselves, as the petitions were withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Gurvinderjeet Singh Oberoi, filed writ petitions before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. The petitions sought to quash various notices and orders issued under Sections 148A, 148, 147, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with all consequential proceedings. The respondents are various income tax authorities, including the Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Raipur-1, and the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. The assessment years are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The petitioner sought to challenge the reassessment proceedings initiated against him.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notices and orders issued under Sections 148A, 148, 147, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the consequential proceedings are liable to be quashed? (Question of law and mixed fact and law) The petitioner sought to quash the notices and orders related to reassessment proceedings. The revenue contended that an efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by preferring appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The petitioner, acknowledging this submission, sought permission to withdraw the petitions with liberty to approach the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
1 2026:CGHC:25907 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 205 of 2023 1 - Gurvinderjeet Singh Oberoi S/o - J.S. Oberoi Aged About 48 Years R/o - A-505, Sterling Residency No. 80, R M V -Ii Nd Stage, Near Scientific Nursery Karnataka, 560094. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Raipur-1 Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pin 492001. 2 - Chief Commissioner Of Income-Tax Raipur, Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh P I N 492001 3 - Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle-1(1) Raipur, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 492001 4 - Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-6(3)(1) B M T C Building, 80-Feet Road, 6th Block, Koramangala Bangaluru-560095. 5 - Additional/joint/deputy/assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Icome-Tax Officer National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. --- Respondent(s) WITH WPT No. 206 of 2023 1 - Gurvinderjeet Singh Oberoi S/o - J.S. Oberoi Aged About 48 Years R/o - A-505, Sterling Residency No. 80, R M V -Ii Nd Stage, Near Scientific Nursery Karnataka, 560094. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Raipur-1 Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pin 492001. 2 - Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Circle-1(1) Raipur, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 492001 Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.06.24 18:21:11 +0530 2 3 - Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-6(3)(1) B M T C Building, 80-Feet Road, 6th Block, Koramangala Bangaluru-560095. 4 - Additional/joint/deputy/assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Icome-Tax Officer National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. S. Rajeshwara Rao, Advocate along with Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Ajay Kumarani, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 24.6.2026 1) The petitioner has filed these writ petitions seeking following reliefs:- (i) to call for the relevant records of the respondents for its kind perusal. (ii) To quash the notice issued under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act and all proceedings following

through said order. (iii) To quash the order passed under clause (d) of section 148A of the Act and all proceedings following through said order. (iv) To quash impugned notice issued under section 148 of the Act and all proceedings flowing through said notice. (v) To quash the impugned order passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act. (v) (vi) To stay the effect and operation of impugned assessment order [Annexure-P/4] and all proceedings pursuant to the said order till disposal of present petition. (vii) To pass such other and/ or further order and/or orders as the Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3 2) Learned counsel appearing for respondents would submit that there is efficacious alternative remedy available in favour of the petitioner and he may prefer appeals before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] according to the provisions of Section 246A of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3) At this stage, Mr. Rao would seek permission of this Court to withdraw these petitions with liberty to approach appellate authority. However, he would pray that a direction may be issued to the appellate authority to decide the appeals expeditiously. 4) Heard. 5) Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by respective Advocates, these petitions are dismissed as withdrawn and the petitioner is granted 30 days time to prefer respective appeals before the appellate authority. If such appeals are preferred by the petitioner, the appellate authority shall decide them expeditiously after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties. (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →