VIJAY KEDIA SON OF SHRI MOTI CHAND KEDIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/18639/2023HC RajasthanRJHC02094899202302 July 2024Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR1 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed. The court granted the petitioner the liberty to raise all the issues that were intended to be raised in the writ petition before the appellate authority in the pending appeal. The reasoning is based on the petitioner's submission that an appeal has already been filed against the order under challenge, and they wish to pursue that remedy instead of the writ petition. Therefore, the operative direction is the dismissal of the petition with liberty granted as prayed for. No specific issue was decided on merits.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vijay Kedia, filed a Civil Writ Petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The petition challenged an order or action by the Income Tax Department, specifically mentioning an order passed under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur, and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur. The procedural history indicates that the writ petition was filed during the pendency of which the petitioner filed an appeal against the Section 148 order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner can withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to raise all issues in the pending appeal? (Question of procedure/mixed law and fact) Assessee's Contention: The counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition, an appeal against the order passed under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, has been filed. The petitioner is not pressing the present petition and seeks liberty to raise all the issues in the appeal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue's side regarding the withdrawal of the petition or the liberty to raise issues in appeal. However, the revenue was represented by counsel.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2024:RJ-JP:27312-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18639/2023 Vijay Kedia Son Of Shri Moti Chand Kedia, Aged About 61 Years, Having His Address At 35, Gangwal Park, Moti Dungri Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur Having Its Address At New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road Jaipur 2. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur Having Its Address At Room No. 416 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi, LIC Building Ambedkar Circle Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohan Chatter, Adv. for Mr. Siddharth Ranka, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Judgment / Order 02/07/2024 Counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of the petition, appeal against order passed under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been filed and is not pressing this petition with liberty to raise all the issues in appeal. Petition is dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed for. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Mohita /27

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →