Shree Parshv Housing vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax 5(1)

PDF · subscribers
WP/28127/2022HC Madhya Pradesh01 April 2026Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA2 pages
For Petitioner: Ashish GoyalFor Respondent: Assistant Solicitor General
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court observed that the petitioner had already preferred an appeal against the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court noted that the writ petition had not seen any progress. Therefore, the High Court directed that the petitioner could place reliance on the Supreme Court judgment in "Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal" before the Appellate Authority, as this judgment is binding on the Appellate Authority. The Court held that since an appeal has already been preferred and is pending, the appeal should be decided in accordance with the law. The writ petition was disposed of on this basis, without deciding the merits of the challenge to the show cause notice or the order under Section 148A(d).

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shree Parshv Housing, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur challenging a show cause notice dated July 25, 2022, issued under Section 148 and an order dated July 23, 2022, passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was time-barred and liable to be quashed, citing the Supreme Court judgment in "Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal." The petitioner also stated that a final order under Section 148A(d) had been passed after the show cause notice, and an appeal against this order was pending. The High Court noted that the petition had not progressed and that an appeal had already been preferred.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the show cause notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is time-barred and liable to be quashed. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the show cause notice is time-barred and should be quashed, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in "Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal, [(2024) 301 Taxman 238 (SC)]." Revenue's Contention: No specific contention was recorded for the revenue in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL ON THE 1st OF APRIL, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 28127 of 2022 SHREE PARSHV HOUSING Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5(1) AND OTHERS Appearance: Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava and Shri Ashish Goyal - Advocates for the petitioner. Shri Siddharth Sharma - Advocate for the respondents. ORDER Per: Justice Vivek Rusia The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the show cause notice dated 25.07.2022 issued under Section 148 and Order dated 23.07.2022 under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The petition came up for hearing for the first time on 09.05.2024 along with bunch of cases. Thereafter, the petition came up for hearing on 16.08.2024 on which date, learned counsel for petitioner was directed to seek instructions. 3. Shri Abhijeet Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after issuance of show cause notice dated 25.07.2022, the 1 WP-28127-2022 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:25823 Signed by: SHIVANI TIWARI Signing time: 4/2/2026 11:42:48 AM Signature Not Verified

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE (PRADEEP MITTAL) JUDGE Assessment Officer has passed the final order under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thereafter, the petitioner has preferred an appeal which is pending for consideration. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the show cause notice is time barred and the same is liable to be quashed by relying on a judgment passed by the Apex Court in case of "Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal, [(2024) 301 Taxman 238 (SC)]" . 4. Since the petitioner has preferred an appeal, the petitioner may place reliance on the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court before the Appellate Authority as the judgment which is binding on High Court is also binding on the Appellate Authority. Since an appeal has already been preferred and also there is no progress in this petition till date, let the appeal be decided in accordance with law. 5. In view of the above, present petition is disposed of. Shivani

2 WP-28127-2022 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:25823 Signed by: SHIVANI TIWARI Signing time: 4/2/2026 11:42:48 AM Signature Not Verified

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →