SIDH KUMAR RANKA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/22308/2025HC Rajasthan2025:RJ-JD:48764-DB13 November 2025Author: VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, BIPIN GUPTA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal, following a coordinate bench's decision in M/s. Jagtamba Timber Mart, held that the notice dated March 24, 2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the assessment order dated March 21, 2025, passed under Section 147 of the Act, along with consequential proceedings, were liable to be quashed and set aside. The court accepted the petitioner's undertaking to withdraw the appeal already filed. Liberty was granted to the Revenue to revive the notice under Section 148 if the Supreme Court were to interfere with the judgments in Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Sharda Devi Chhajer, or Shree Cement Limited. All other grounds raised by the petitioner were not pressed and were left open to be taken up at an appropriate stage. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of the prior order, and all pending applications were also disposed of.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sidh Kumar Ranka, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur. The petition challenged a notice dated March 24, 2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and an assessment order dated March 21, 2025, passed under Section 147 of the Act, along with consequential proceedings. The respondents were various income tax authorities, including the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. The parties agreed that the controversy was covered by a prior judgment of a coordinate bench in M/s. Jagtamba Timber Mart Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, decided on November 12, 2025.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated March 24, 2024, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the assessment order dated March 21, 2025, passed under Section 147 of the Act, along with consequential proceedings, are liable to be quashed and set aside? Assessee's contention: The petitioner's counsel agreed that other grounds raised were not being pressed and would be taken up at an appropriate stage if required, implying a focus on the quashing of the notice and assessment order. Revenue's contention: The Revenue acknowledged that the court might grant the petitioner's prayer based on the current law, citing the judgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. However, the Revenue requested liberty to revive the notice issued under Section 148 if the Supreme Court were to interfere with the judgments in Hexaware Technologies Ltd., Sharda Devi Chhajer, or Shree Cement Limited.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2025:RJ-JD:48764-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 22308/2025 Sidh Kumar Ranka S/o Shri Sohan Raj Ranka, Aged About 58 Years, R/o 5 A, Paota C Road, Income Tax Colony, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Income Tax Office And Colony, Paota C Road, Jodhpur Kacheri, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. 2. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (National Faceless Assessment Centre), 4Th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001 3. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Cbdt Headquarters North Block (Department Of Revenue), New Delhi 110001 4. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 1, Jodhpur, Income Tax Office And Colony, Paota C Road, Jodhpur Kacheri, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. 5. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Dc Central Circle 1, Jodhpur, Income Tax Office And Colony, Paota C Road, Jodhpur Kacheri, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Himanshu Pareek Mr. Naman Mohnot For Respondent(s) : Mr. KK Bissa HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA

Order 13/11/2025

1.

Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.22164/2025 (M/s. Jagtamba Timber Mart Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax) decided on 12.11.2025 in the following terms:- (Uploaded on 14/11/2025 at 04:07:48 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:33:37 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:48764-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-22308/2025] “12. In these circumstances, notice dated 24th March 2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act and assessment order dated 21th March 2025 passed under Section 147 of the Act along with consequential proceedings are liable to be quashed and set aside.

13.

At this stage, Mr. Bissa submits that in judgment of 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.

14.

In view of the above, counsel for the petitioner states that other grounds raised are not being pressed upon and they will be taken at appropriate stage, if required.

15.

Therefore, keeping open all rights and contentions of parties, we quash and set aside notice dated 24th March 2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act and assessment order dated 21th March 2025 passed under Section 147 of the Act along with consequential proceedings, with liberty as prayed.

16.

In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to apply within two weeks to withdraw the appeal already filed.

17.

Undertaking accepted.

18.

Petition disposed.

19.

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

2.

In view of the submissions made before this Court, the present Writ Petition is also disposed of in terms of the order passed in M/s Jagtamba Timber Mart (supra). (BIPIN GUPTA),J (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 98-nitin/- Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 14/11/2025 at 04:07:48 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:33:37 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 →