KISHAN LAL PRAJAPATI SON OF SHRI GOPI RAM PRAJAPATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/16956/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02091754202206 December 2024Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,UMA SHANKER VYAS2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no relief could be granted in the writ petition without the petitioner challenging the assessment order passed on 21.05.2023. The Court reasoned that the assessment order is a subsequent development that has not been brought under challenge, either by way of appeal or any other petition. Therefore, the writ petition, as it stood, was not maintainable for granting any relief. The Court dismissed the petition but granted the petitioner liberty to challenge the assessment order in an appropriate forum as permissible under the law. The specific grounds urged in the writ petition were not decided on merits due to the procedural deficiency.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kishan Lal Prajapati, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, challenging actions of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Jaipur, and the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The core of the dispute involved a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 30.07.2022. The case remained pending without admission, with an adjournment sought on the first listing. Subsequently, an assessment order was passed on 21.05.2023. This assessment order was not challenged by the petitioner through appeal or any other petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court can grant relief in a writ petition when the assessment order, which is the subsequent action, has not been challenged by the petitioner? (Question of law turning on the principles of alternative remedies and the scope of writ jurisdiction). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner sought to challenge the proceedings initiated by the issuance of the Section 148 notice. The petitioner's counsel sought time to take appropriate steps, implying a desire to rectify procedural lapses or pursue the challenge. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Income Tax Officer, implicitly argued that the assessment order, having been passed and not challenged, supersedes the earlier notice, and the writ petition is not the appropriate forum for relief without challenging the final assessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2024:RJ-JP:50264-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16956/2022 Kishan Lal Prajapati Son Of Shri Gopi Ram Prajapati, Resident Of Plot No. 3, Mahadev Nagar, 22 Godam, Nandpuri, Jaipur - 302021 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Jaipur Having Its Address At New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur - 302005 2. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi, Through Its Chairman ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranka with Ms. Satvika Jha For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Bhati for Mr. Anuroop Singhi HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Order 06/12/2024 1. Though number of grounds have been urged, we find that notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued way back on 30.07.2022 and the case remained pending without even admission as adjournment was sought when the case was listed for the first time. In the meantime, assessment order has also been passed on 21.05.2023 which has not been challenged either by filing an appeal or a petition. 2. Without challenge to the order of assessment, no relief can be granted in this petition.

[2024:RJ-JP:50264-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-16956/2022] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for sometime to take an appropriate steps. 4. In view of above, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. 5. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed with liberty to challenge the order passed in assessment in an appropriate forum, as may be permissible under the law. (UMA SHANKER VYAS),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ N.Gandhi-Gaurav/1

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →