SATYANARAYAN NATHULAL vs. UNION OF INDIA

CGHC010163242023

2026:CGHC:31982

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 156 of 2023 * - Satyanarayan Nathulal S/o. Shri. Lalit Kumar Agrawal, Aged About 32 Years Gandhi Chowk, Neroa, Tahsil - Tilda, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 493114

... Petitioner Versus 1 - Union Of India Through Secretary, Central Board Of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi. 2 - Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), Aaykar Bhawan, Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur 4 - National Faceless Assessment Unit, Through Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, NFAC, New Delhi.

... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rishabh Agrawal, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. S. Rajeshwara Rao, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Ankita Gaurahah, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Amit

Chaudhary, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 27/07/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.i To call for the relevant records of the respondents for its kind perusal. 10.ii To declare illegal and quash the impugned notice issued on 30/06/2021 under section 148 of the Act for lack of digital/manual signature [Annexure-P1]. 10.iii To declare illegal and quash the impugned order passed under clause (d) of section 148A of the Act [Annexure-P/2] for being passed without mandatory prior approval of the authority specified in section 151(ii) of the Act and all the proceedings flowing through said order. Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.07.28 11:26:30 +0530

2 10.iv To declare illegal and quash impugned notice issued under section 148 of the Act [Annexure-P/3] for being passed beyond the due date prescribed in section 149 of the Act and being violative of provisions of section 151A read with CBDT’s Notification dated 31/03/2022 and all proceedings flowing through said notice. 10.v To stay all proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice [Annexure-P/3] and direct Respondent No. 4 not to pass final orders till disposal of present petition. 10.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. He may prefer 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. Rishabh 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. 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. 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 vatti