WAGAD INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/19149/2024HC Rajasthan2025:RJ-JD:33577-DB29 July 2025Author: PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, SANDEEP TANEJA4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the controversy in these writ petitions was squarely covered by its previous judgment in 'M/s. S.M. Industries vs. Union of India & Anr.' and 'Sharda Devi Chhajer'. The court observed that the dispute vis-à-vis the jurisdiction of Faceless and Jurisdictional Assessing Authorities had been settled. Based on the joint prayers and consensus, the court declared the notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officers as illegal and quashed them. The court granted liberty to the respondents to proceed via the mode of Faceless Assessment in terms of the judgment in 'Sharda Devi Chhajer'. The period during which the petitions remained pending was to be excluded for Faceless Assessing Officer proceedings. Any issues of limitation were to be decided by the Assessing Officer in terms of 'Rajeev Bansal'. Any other unadjudicated issues could be agitated again before the court. Proceedings under the Faceless Assessment Scheme were to be conducted strictly in accordance with law.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Wagad Infraprojects Private Limited, filed three writ petitions challenging orders and notices issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitions were filed against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur, the Director General of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur, and the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The core of the dispute revolved around the jurisdiction of the Faceless Assessing Officer versus the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The parties agreed that the controversy was covered by a previous judgment of the same court in 'M/s. S.M. Industries vs. Union of India & Anr.' decided on March 20, 2025. The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated for these petitions, but the lead case mentioned refers to Assessment Year 2013-14.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order under Section 148A(d) and notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, passed on 29.07.2022, are illegal and liable to be quashed? (Question of law and fact, concerning Sections 148A and 148). 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by way of notice dated 22.05.2022 for reopening of assessment are illegal and liable to be quashed, restraining the respondents from initiating proceedings under Sections 147 to 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (Question of law and fact, concerning Sections 147 to 153). Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner sought to quash the impugned order and notice, declaring them illegal. They also sought to restrain the respondents from initiating proceedings for reopening of assessment. The primary argument, as agreed by both parties, was limited to the issue of Faceless Assessing Officer versus Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, with other issues reserved for future adjudication. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue did not record specific contentions for these petitions, but implicitly defended the notices and orders issued. Their agreement to be bound by the precedent suggests an acceptance of the court's prior ruling on the jurisdictional issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 148,Section 147,Section 153

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2025:RJ-JD:33577-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19149/2024 Wagad Infraprojects Private Limited, Through Shri Ashok Jain, Director (Pan-Aabcw1489K), Plot No.15, C/o Rajmal Rajwat, Near Bharathi Engg. Titadi Bus Stand, Udaipur-313001 New Address (Present)- 414, 4Th Floor, Times Square Arcade, Opp. Rambaug- Nr. Ravilja Plaza, Thaltej, Shilaj Road, Ahmedabad- 380059 Email - Account@wagadinfra.com ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Subcity Centre, Savina, Udaipur, Udaipur-313001 Email - Udaipur.dcit.cen1@incometax.gov.in 2. Director General Of Income Tax (Inv.), Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road, Statute Circle, Jaipur- 302005 Email - Dgit.inv.jaipur@incometax.gov.in 3. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi-110001 Email - Delhi.dcit.judicial.hc@incometax.gov.in ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19171/2024 Wagad Infraprojects Private Limited, Through Ashok Jain, Director (Pan-Aabcw1489K) Plot No.15, C/o Rajmal Rajwat, Near Bharathi Engg. Titadi Bus Stand, Udaipur-313001 New Address (Present) 414, 4Th Floor, Times Square Arcade, Opp. Rambaug, Nr. Ravija Plaza, Thaltej, Shilaj Road, Ahmedabad - 380059. Email- Account@wagadinfra.com ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Subcity Centre, Savina, Udaipur, Udaipur-313001 Email- Udaipur.dcit.cen1@incometax.gov.in 2. Director General Of Income Tax (Inv.), Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road, Statute Circle, Jaipur- 302005 Email- Dgit.inv.jaipur@incometax.gov.in (Uploaded on 30/07/2025 at 04:38:18 PM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:20:55 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:33577-DB] (2 of 4) [CW-19149/2024] 3. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi-110001 Email Delhi.dcit.judicial.hc@incometax.gov.in ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19398/2024 Wagad Infraprojects Private Limited, Through Shri Ashok Jain, Director (Pan - Aabcw1489K) Plot No. 15, C/o Rajmal Rajwat, Near Bharati Engg. Titadi Bus Stand, Udaipur - 313001 Ne Address (Present)- 414, 4Th Floor, Times Square Arcade, Opp. Rambaug- Nr. Ravija Plaza, Thalte4J, Shilaj Road, Ahmedabad- 380059. Email - Account@wagadinfra.com ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Subcity Centre, Savina, Udaipur, Udaipur-313001 Email-daipur.dcit.cen1@incometax.gov.in 2. Director General Of Income Tax (Inv.), Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road, Statute Circle, Jaipur- 302005 Email- Dgit.inv.jaipur@incometax.gov.in 3. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Ministry Of Finance North Block, New Delhi-110001 Email Delhi.dcit.judicial.hc@incometax.gov.in ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harshit Bhurani For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA

Order 29/07/2025

1.

With the consent of the parties that the controversy involved in the present matters is squarely covered with the order passed by this Court in the case of ‘M/s. S.M. Industries vs. Union of India & Anr.’ (D.B. Civil Writ No.3270/2023 decided on (Uploaded on 30/07/2025 at 04:38:18 PM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:20:55 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:33577-DB] (3 of 4) [CW-19149/2024] 20.03.2025) along with other connected writ petitions; the order dated 20.03.2025 is reproduced hereunder :- “1. Since the instant petitions involves an identical controversy, therefore, the same are being decided by this common judgment, while taking the prayer clauses, facts and submission from the above-numbered D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16678/2022, while treating the same as a lead case.

1.1.

The prayer clauses read as under: “It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this petition for writ preferred by the petitioner may kindly be allowed in toto and the following reliefs may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner:- A. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned order under Section 148 A Sub Clause (d) of Income Tax Act, 1961 passed on 29.07.2022 (Annexure-12) and impugned notice issued under Section 148 on 29.07.2022 (Annexure-13) may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed and set aside. B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the proceedings initiated by way of notice dated 22.05.2022 (Annexure-7) for reopening of assessment, reassessment or recomputation may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed and set aside and the respondents may kindly be perpetually restrained to initiate proceedings under Section 147 to 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the relevant Assessment Year 2013-14 questioning the same. Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper may kindly be passed in favor of the petitioner.”

2.

Learned counsel for both the parties, present in the Court, at the time of reserving of the judgment, submitted that they are raising a limited issue of Faceless Assessing Officer viz-a-viz (Uploaded on 30/07/2025 at 04:38:18 PM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:20:55 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:33577-DB] (4 of 4) [CW-19149/2024] Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and seek to keep rest of the issues open for future adjudication.

3.

This Court observes that the controversy in the present batch of writ petitions concerns the same issue of law as has already been settled by this Court in the case of Sharda Devi Chhajer (supra) regarding the dispute vis-a-vis jurisdiction of Faceless and Jurisdictional Assessing Authority, and therefore, the same settled proposition of law shall govern the field in the instant case as well.

4.

This Court, on the basis of the joint prayers being made and the consensus being arrived at between counsel for the respective parties, observes that all the petitions, which were reserved and are now being disposed of, while treating the Jurisdictional Assessing Officers’ notices illegal. The same are quashed with a liberty to the respondents to proceed via mode of Faceless Assessment in terms of the judgment rendered by this Court in Sharda Devi Chhajer (supra).

5.

The limitation for the period when the petitions have remained pending before this Court shall be excluded for the Faceless Assessing Officer proceedings. In case, there is any issue of Limitation, the Assessing Officer shall be free to decide it in terms of Rajeev Bansal (supra). In case any other issue remains unadjudicated, the parties shall be free to agitate it again before this Court. It is also made clear that any further proceedings under the Faceless Assessment Scheme shall be done strictly in accordance with law.”

2.

In light of the aforequoted judgment, these writ petitions are disposed of in the same terms. (SANDEEP TANEJA), J (DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 126-127-128 -Ravi Khandelwal Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 30/07/2025 at 04:38:18 PM) (Downloaded on 27/10/2026 at 11:20:55 PM)

More judgments on Section 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →