SHREE BADE MATHURESH JI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the writ petition challenging the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act had become infructuous. This was based on the submission by the respondent that a re-assessment for the accounting year 2006-07 had already been completed pursuant to the impugned notice, and the assessee had subsequently filed an appeal against this re-assessment order. The Court noted that no one appeared for the petitioner to contest these facts. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to make an application for revival of the writ petition if any issue survived. The stay application was also disposed of.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Shree Bade Mathuresh Ji Temple Board, filed a writ petition challenging a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The assessment year in question was 2006-07. The respondent, Income-Tax Officer & Ors., stated that a re-assessment for the year 2006-07 had already been completed following the notice, and the assessee had filed an appeal against this re-assessment. Consequently, the writ petition challenging the notice under Section 148 was rendered infructuous. The judgment also notes that a related issue for the subsequent assessment year 2008-09 is pending before a Division Bench. No one appeared for the petitioner.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the writ petition challenging the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act has become infructuous, given that a re-assessment for the relevant year (2006-07) has been completed and an appeal has been filed by the assessee. Assessee's contentions: Not recorded as no one appeared for the petitioner. Revenue's contentions: The re-assessment for the accounting year 2006-07 has been made following the notice under Section 148, and an appeal has been filed by the assessee. Therefore, the writ petition challenging the notice has become infructuous. The issue for the subsequent assessment year 2008-09 is pending before a Division Bench.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3532/2013 Shree Bade Mathuresh Ji Temple Board Versus Income-Tax Officer & Ors. Date of Order: 09/09/2014 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI None present for the petitioner. Mr. Snhas Dabade-OIC-ACIT, Kota, present in person. It is stated that after the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, re-assessment of the accounting year 2006- 07 has already been made followed by an appeal by the assessee. The writ petition has thus become infructuous for challenge to the notice under Section 148 of the Act. The issue involved therein is otherwise pending before the Division Bench in regard to the subsequent assessment year of 2008-09. In view of the facts given by the respondent and as none appears for the petitioner thus, writ petition is dismissed as rendered infructuous after re-assessment in pursuance to the impugned notice and thereupon appeal has also been preferred. It is however, with the liberty to the petitioner that if anything survives in the writ petition, make an application for
its revival. This disposes of the stay application also.
(M.N. BHANDARI), J. S.R. Kumawat, Jr. P.A. All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed. Seva Ram Kumawat Jr.P.A.
More judgments on Section 148
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026