Netrapal Singh Yadav Through Manoj Yadav vs. Central Board Of Direct Taxes

PDF · subscribers
WP/10329/2023HC Madhya Pradesh19 September 2025Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK2 pages
For Petitioner: Shashwat SethFor Respondent: Harshavardhan Topre
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that since an assessment order dated 14-12-2023 under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act had already been passed, keeping the writ petition pending would serve no useful purpose. The Court reasoned that the challenge was initially to the reassessment proceedings, and with the final assessment order in place, the appropriate course of action would be for the petitioner to challenge the assessment order itself, if advised. Therefore, the petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue legal remedies against the assessment order. No specific finding was made on the merits of the reassessment proceedings or the assessment order.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Netrapal Singh Yadav, filed a writ petition challenging reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department. The respondents' counsel informed the Court that a show cause notice dated 14-03-2023 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act was issued to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 2019-20. Subsequently, an assessment order dated 14-12-2023 under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act was passed in the absence of the assessee or their representative. Given that the assessment order has been passed, the respondents argued that the purpose of the writ petition was moot.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition challenging reassessment proceedings is maintainable when an assessment order has already been passed (mixed question of law and fact, concerning the procedural stage under the Income Tax Act). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner filed the writ petition to challenge the initiation of reassessment proceedings. (No specific arguments recorded for the petitioner regarding the maintainability after the assessment order was passed). Revenue's Contention: The respondents argued that since an assessment order has been passed pursuant to the show cause notice, the writ petition challenging the reassessment proceedings has become infructuous, and no useful purpose would be served by keeping it pending.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(d),Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA YADAV ON THE 19th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 10329 of 2023 NETRAPAL SINGH YADAV THROUGH MANOJ YADAV Versus CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS Appearance: Shri Ankit Sajeriya - Advocate on behalf of Shri Shashwat Seth - Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Harshvardhan Topre - Advocate for the respondents. ORDER Per: Justice Anand Pathak 1. The instant petition is preferred by the petitioner against the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents informs this Court that petitioner challenged the show cause notice dated 14-03-2023 issued under the provisions of Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act whereby the assessment for the assessment year 2019-20 has been reopened, however in pursuance thereof, in absence of assessee or its representative, assessment order dated 14-12-2023 has already been passed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, therefore, purpose of filing of this petition is over. 3. Considering the submission and the fact that the assessment order 1 WP-10329-2023 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:23098 Signed by: ANIL KUMAR CHAURASIYA Signing time: 23-09-2025 02:53:55 PM Signature Not Verified

(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE (PUSHPENDRA YADAV) JUDGE has already been passed, no useful purpose would be served to keep this petition pending. Thus, the present petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said order in accordance with law, if advised so. 4. Petition stands disposed of. Anil*

2 WP-10329-2023 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:23098 Signed by: ANIL KUMAR CHAURASIYA Signing time: 23-09-2025 02:53:55 PM Signature Not Verified

More judgments on Section 148A(d)

All 544 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →