MAJDOOR KISAN AKALI DAL vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-EXEMPTIONS

PDF · subscribers
CW/18885/2025HC Rajasthan2025:RJ-JD:42750-DB24 September 2025Author: K.R. SHRIRAM, SANDEEP TANEJA2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal quashed and set aside the notice dated June 13, 2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This decision was based on the concession made by the revenue that the notice was issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not a Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), which is contrary to established High Court precedents. The Court relied on its own judgments in Shree Cement Limited, Sharda Devi Chhajer, and Hexaware Technologies Ltd. The revenue was granted liberty to revive the notice if the Apex Court were to interfere with the aforementioned High Court judgments. The petition was disposed of with this liberty, and any re-assessment order passed would also stand quashed and set aside. All other grounds were reserved by the petitioner for an appropriate stage.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Majdoor Kisan Akali Dal, a political party, challenged a notice dated June 13, 2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice was issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not a Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). The respondents are various income tax authorities, including the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax-Exemptions and the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (National Faceless Assessment Centre). The case came before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a notice dated June 13, 2025, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of a Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) is valid and not bad in law? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the notice issued by the JAO is invalid, relying on this Court's judgments in Shree Cement Limited and Sharda Devi Chhajer, which held such notices to be bad. Revenue's Contention: The revenue conceded that one of the grounds raised by the petitioner is covered by the High Court's judgment. However, it was stated that a Special Leave Petition (SLP) has been filed in the Apex Court against the judgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. (which followed Sharda Devi Chhajer). The revenue requested liberty to revive the notice if the Apex Court overturns the High Court's decisions.

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
[2025:RJ-JD:42750-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18885/2025 Majdoor Kisan Akali Dal, A Political Partyhaving Its Registered Office At Village 75 G.b., Tehsil Anupgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan- 335704, Through Its President Shri Preetpal Singh S/o Shri Daljeet Singh, Aged About 50 Years, R/o 75 Gb, Po 72 Gb, District- Ganganagar, 335703, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax-Exemptions, Jaipur, 3Rd Floor, Kailash Heights, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur- 302015. 2. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (National Faceless Assessment Centre), 2Nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi-110003. 3. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Cbdt Headquarters North Block (Department Of Revenue), New Delhi- 110001. 4. Assessing Officer, Circle- Exemption, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Sharad Kothari Mr. Pranjul Mehta For Respondents : Mr. K.K. Bissa HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA

Order 24/09/2025

1.

Mr. Bissa, who appears on advance copy, agrees with Mr. Kothari that one of the grounds raised certainly is covered by a judgment of this Court.

2.

Ground referred to is that the notice dated 13th June 2025 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) and this Court in the case of Shree Cement Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax & Others1 following Sharda Devi Chhajer Vs. The Income Tax 1 DB Civil Writ Petition No.10540/2024, dated 05.08.2025 at Jaipur Bench (unreported) (Uploaded on 25/09/2025 at 12:10:34 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:29:57 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:42750-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-18885/2025] Officer & Another2 and Hexaware Technologies Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 15(1)(2)3,has held that such a notice will be bad and not valid.

3.

At the same time, Mr. Bissa states that in Hexaware Technologies Ltd.(supra), Revenue has preferred a Special Leave Petition and notice has been issued. Counsel states that in view of the law as it stands today, Court may grant the prayer of petitioner but in case the Apex Court interferes with judgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. (supra), Sharda Devi Chhajer (supra) or Shree Cement Limited (supra), then Revenue should be given liberty to revive the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.

4.

Mr. Kothari states that in view of the above, for the present, petitioner will reserve its right to raise other grounds at an appropriate stage.

5.

Therefore, keeping open all rights and contentions of parties, we quash and set aside notice dated 13th June 2025 issued under Section 148 of the Act with liberty as prayed.

6.

Petition disposed.

7.

Consequently, all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed.

8.

In case, if any re-assessment order is passed, the same will also stand quashed and set aside. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J (K.R. SHRIRAM),CJ 11-pooja/- 2 2025 SCCOnLine Raj 3386 3 [2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 25/09/2025 at 12:10:34 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:29:57 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 →