BEC INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA

PDF · subscribers
WPT/136/2023HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01015819202329 July 2026Bench: 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 respondents pointed out the availability of an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which allows for an appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the appellate authority and requested a direction for expeditious disposal of the appeal. The Court, taking these submissions into account, dismissed the petition as withdrawn. The petitioner was granted 30 days to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority. If an appeal is filed, the appellate authority is directed to decide it expeditiously after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties. No decision was made on the merits of the original challenge to the notices and order.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, BEC Infra Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. The petition challenged a notice issued under Section 148(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, an order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, and a subsequent notice issued under Section 148 of the Act. The petitioner sought to declare these notices and orders illegal and to quash them, along with all consequential proceedings. The respondents, represented by the Union of India and tax authorities, contended that an efficacious alternative remedy was available to the petitioner in the form of an appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned notice issued under Section 148(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act, and the subsequent notice under Section 148 of the Act are illegal and liable to be quashed? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, concerning Sections 148 and 148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's contention: The petitioner sought to declare the notices and order illegal and quash them. No specific arguments were recorded in the judgment regarding the merits of the challenge to the notices and order. Revenue's contention: The respondents argued that an efficacious alternative remedy by way of an appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is available to the petitioner.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A,Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CGHC010158192023

2026:CGHC:32910

NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 136 of 2023 BEC Infra Private Limited Premises No. 29, C.C. Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, Delhi (Through Director Ashish Jain S/o Arvind Jain Aged About 47 Years), R/o 43, Nehru Nagar, Bhilai Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1- Union of India through Secretary, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi. 2- Chief Commissioner of Incom Tax Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3- Assistant Commissioner of Incom Tax Circle (1), Incom Tax office, 32/ 32, Bunglows, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh

... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Rishabh Agrawal, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. S. Rajeshwar Rao, Advocate For respective Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Banjare, Central Government Counsel Ms. Ankita Gauraha, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 30/07/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “10.(i) to call for the relevant records of the respondents for its kind perusal. Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE

2 (ii) To declare illegal and quash the impugned notice issued on 05/03/2023 under clause (a) of section 148 of the Act [Annexure-P/1] and all the proceedings flowing through said order. (iii) To declare illegal and quash the impugned order passed under clause (d) of section 148A of the Act [Annexure-P/2] and all the proceedings flowing through said order. (iv) To declare illegal and quash impugned notice issued under section 148 of the Act [Annexure-P/3] and all proceedings flowing through said notice. (v) To stay all proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice [Annexure-P/3] and direct Respondent authorities not to pass final orders till disposal of present petition. (vi) 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.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondents would submit that there is efficacious alternative remedy available in favour of the petitioner to prefer an appeal 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. Agrawal would seek permission of this Court to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach appellate authority. However, he would pray that a direction may be issued to the appellate authority to decide the appeal expeditiously. 4. Heard.

3 5. Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by respective Advocates, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn and the petitioner is granted 30 days time to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority. 6. If such an appeal is preferred by the petitioner, the appellate authority shall decide it expeditiously after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties. Sd/-

Rakesh Mohan Pandey

JUDGE Nadim

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →