RAS BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RAIPUR - 1

PDF · subscribers
WPT/154/2021HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01021005202107 May 2026Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur dismissed the writ petition for want of prosecution. The court noted that the petitioner had failed to appear before it on two occasions, despite the matter being called twice. In the absence of the petitioner, the court was left with no alternative but to dismiss the petition. Therefore, no decision was made on the merits of the case concerning the validity of the Section 148 notice or the proceedings initiated. The operative direction was the dismissal of the petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ras Buildcon Private Limited, through its Director Sanjay Agrawal, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. The petition sought to quash a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the proceedings initiated pursuant to it. The notice was issued by the Income Tax Officer Ward 4(1), Raipur, and bore DIN & Notice No. ITBA/AST/S/148/2020-21/1033926369(1) dated 30/06/2021. The respondents were the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, and the Income Tax Officer Ward 4(1), Raipur. The matter was listed for hearing on 08/05/2026. The petitioner failed to appear before the court on two occasions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto are liable to be quashed. The petitioner's contention, as indicated by the relief sought, is that the notice and subsequent proceedings are invalid and should be set aside. The revenue's arguments are not recorded in the judgment as the petitioner did not appear. The judgment does not explicitly state the revenue's arguments or any specific grounds raised by the petitioner beyond seeking the quashing of the notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1

2026:CGHC:21631

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 154 of 2021 * - Ras Buildcon Private Limited Office At FF-35-36 Millennium Plaza, GE Road, Banstall, Raipur Through Director Sanjay Agrawal, 58 Yrs., S/o Late Dr. Ramavatar Agrawal, 9B, South Avenue, Chaubey Colony, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

... Petitioner Versus 1 - Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Raipur - 1 New Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Income Tax Officer Ward 4(1), Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

... Respondents For Petitioner : None appeared even in two rounds For Respondents : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Amit Chaudhari, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 08/05/2026

1.

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 Quashing the impugned DIN & Notice No. ITBA / AST / S / 148 / 2020-21 / 1033926369 (1) dated 30/06/2021 issued by Income Tax Officer Ward 4 (1), Raipur under Section 148 of the Act and proceedings initiated pursuant thereto (Annexure - P/1).

10.

2 Pass any other order or orders as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.” KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.05.08 17:16:54 +0530

2

2.

The matter is called twice, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner in the first round as well as in the second round. In these circumstances, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution.

3.

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)

Judge vatti

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →