ASHA DEVI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/10435/2026HC Rajasthan2026:RJ-JD:24945-DB21 May 2026Author: PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, NUPUR BHATI3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice dated 19.03.2026 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the sanction note dated 18.03.2026, along with all consequential proceedings, were without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. The reasoning was that the issue concerning interest income from deposits and its disclosure had already been examined and conclusively adjudicated by the CIT(A) in its order dated 04.12.2025. No new material had surfaced thereafter, and the reassessment notice was merely a re-examination of a concluded matter, constituting a 'change of opinion'. The Tribunal found that the appellate order had attained finality, and therefore, the subsequent notice for reopening the assessment on the basis of the same facts and material was beyond the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer. The action of the Assessing Officer in revisiting the concluded matter was deemed an overreach of authority and an improper exercise of power. The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned notice and sanction note were set aside.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Asha Devi, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated 19.03.2026 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a sanction note dated 18.03.2026. The petitioner contended that the controversy was covered by a previous judgment of a Coordinate Bench in Ashok Kumar Manish Kumar HUF Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8724/2026), decided on 01.05.2026. The respondents, including the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax and the Income Tax Officer, did not dispute the applicability of the cited judgment. The judgment under review pertains to the assessment proceedings of the petitioner.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 19.03.2026 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reopening the assessment is valid, considering it is based on the same facts and material already examined and adjudicated by the CIT(A)? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the reopening of assessment was based on a 'change of opinion' as the issue of interest income from deposits and its disclosure was already conclusively adjudicated by the CIT(A) in an earlier order dated 04.12.2025. No new material had come to light, and the reassessment notice was a re-examination of a concluded matter, thus falling within the prohibited category and being without jurisdiction. The petitioner relied on the judgment in Ashok Kumar Manish Kumar HUF Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. Revenue's Contention: The respondents fairly submitted that the judgment cited by the petitioner squarely applies to the present case, implying they did not contest the petitioner's claim that the reopening was invalid.

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
[2026:RJ-JD:24945-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10435/2026 Asha Devi W/o Ashok Kumar Golecha, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Arihant Colony, Balotra (Rural), Barmer, Rajasthan - 344022 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-3(R), Ju, Aayakar Bhawan, Paota C Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan - 342010 2. Income Tax Officer, Balotra, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Circle, Balotra, 344022 3. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal Addl/jcit (A)-2, Aayakar Bhavan, 121, M.g. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai, 600034 4. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Through Secretary, Cbdt Headquarters, North Block (Department Of Revenue), New Delhi - 110001 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chirag Soni Mr. Sharad Kothari For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Bhandari HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order 21/05/2026

1.

Income Tax & Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8724/2026), decided on 01.05.2026, relevant portion whereof reads as under:- (Uploaded on 25/05/2026 at 01:32:07 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:44:28 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:24945-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-10435/2026] "

19.

In the present case, the interest income from deposits and the manner of its disclosure in the return were matters already examined, and conclusively adjudicated, by the CIT(A) in its order dated 04.12.2025. No new or fresh material has come to light thereafter. The sanction note dated 20.03.2026 draws upon the very same figures and information that were before the appellate authority. The reassessment notice dated 23.03.2026 is therefore nothing but a re-examination of a concluded matter, squarely falling within the prohibited category of a change of opinion. It is accordingly held to be without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.

20.

In view of the aforesaid, we are of the opinion that the appellate order having attained finality, the subsequent notice dated 23.03.2026 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for reopening the assessment, on the basis of same facts and material, is clearly beyond the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer and constitutes an overreach of authority. The very issue has already been examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), and therefore cannot be reopened on the same set of facts. The action of the Assessing Officer in seeking to revisit the concluded matter amounts to exceeding his authority and reflects an improper exercise of power.

21.

The writ petition is accordingly allowed. Both i.e. the notice dated 23.03.2026 issued under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (Annexure-2) and sanction note dated 20.03.2026 and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are set aside.

22.

All pending applications including stay application also stand disposed of. "

2.

Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that the aforesaid judgment squarely applies to the present case. (Uploaded on 25/05/2026 at 01:32:07 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:44:28 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:24945-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-10435/2026]

3.

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and in light of the judgment rendered in Ashok Kumar Manish Kumar Huf (supra), the present writ petition is allowed. The notice dated 19.03.2026 issued under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961, (Annexure-2) and Sanction note dated 18.03.2026 (Annexure-3) and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are set aside. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (DR. NUPUR BHATI),J (DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 16-Nirmala/- Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 25/05/2026 at 01:32:07 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:44:28 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 →