SHREE BADE MATHURESH JI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ORS

PDF · subscribers
CW/3533/2013HC RajasthanRJHC02056890201312 September 2014Bench: MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the writ petition had become infructuous. This was based on the respondent's submission that re-assessment for the accounting year 2006-07 had already been completed following the notice under Section 148, 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. Consequently, 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 part of it still 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 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The respondent, Income-Tax Officer, stated that re-assessment for the accounting year 2006-07 had already been completed pursuant to the impugned notice, and an appeal had been filed by the assessee against this re-assessment. The respondent also noted that a related issue for the subsequent assessment year 2008-09 was pending before a Division Bench. No one appeared for the petitioner at the hearing.

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 re-assessment has been completed and an appeal filed against it (mixed question of law and fact). The petitioner did not present any arguments. The respondent argued that the writ petition had become infructuous because the re-assessment proceedings initiated by the impugned notice had concluded with an appeal being filed by the assessee. The respondent also pointed to the pendency of a related issue for a subsequent assessment year before a Division Bench.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

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.3533/2013 Shree Bade Mathuresh ji Temple Board Versus Income-Tax Officer & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 12/09/2014 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI None present for petitioner Mr. Kamlesh Meena – OIC for respondent-Income Tax department, 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. FRBOHRA/3533CWP2013.doc Certificate:

“All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.” FATEH RAJ BOHRA, Sr. P.A.

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →