M/S. ARIHANT SHARECOM PVT. LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER W-3(2),

PDF · subscribers
CW/18767/2019HC RajasthanRJHC01085312201916 January 2020Author: ARUN BHANSALI2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that since an order of assessment has been passed by the assessing authority during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has a statutory remedy of filing an appeal against the assessment order. The Court observed that the petitioner is free to raise all the issues that were raised in the writ petition before the appellate authority. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, with the petitioner being granted the liberty to pursue the appellate remedy in accordance with law. No specific finding was made on the validity of the Section 148 notice itself, as the petition was disposed of on procedural grounds.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Arihant Sharecom Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. During the pendency of this writ petition, the assessing authority passed an order of assessment. The petitioner was represented by Mr. Vikas Balia, and the respondents were the Income Tax Officer W-3(2), Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax C-3, and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, all from the Department of Income Tax, Jodhpur. The court noted that the assessment order is appealable.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition challenging a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is maintainable when an assessment order has subsequently been passed? The petitioner's contention was that they had questioned the validity of the notice under Section 148. However, the judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the petitioner regarding the maintainability of the writ petition post-assessment order. The revenue's contentions are also not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18767/2019 Arihant Sharecom Pvt. Ltd., Having Its Registered Office At 676- A 10Th C Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, Through Its Director Sh. Gautam Jain Aged About 42 Years, S/o Late Sh. Gyan Chand Jain, R/o 159, Narsingh Dhara, Opp. Hanuman Temple, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, 342001. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer W-3(2), Department Of Income Tax, Laxmi Nagar, Jodhpur. 2. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, C-3, Department Of Income Tax, Laxmi Nagar, Jodhpur. 3. Deputy Commissioner Of Incom Tax, Circle-3, Department Of Income Tax, Laxmi Nagar, Jodhpur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Balia For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

Order 16/01/2020 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has questioned the validity of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, however, during pendency of the petition an order of assessment has been passed by the assessing authority.

In view of the order of assessment being appealable, the petitioner has to file the appeal in accordance with law. The petitioner would be free to raise all the issues as have been raised in the present writ petition before the appellate authority. (Uploaded on 16/01/2020 at 05:03:50 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:07:47 AM) (2 of 2) [CW-18767/2019] With the above observations, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to do the needful in accordance with law. (ARUN BHANSALI),J 52-AK Chouhan/- Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 16/01/2020 at 05:03:50 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:07:47 AM)

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →