MURARI LAL SINGHAL S/O SH. DWARKA PRASAD SINGHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/14006/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02074753202213 January 2026Author: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANJEET PUROHIT3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of its previous order dated August 21, 2025, in the case of *Rajesh Sharma*. The observations and directions made in that order shall apply mutatis mutandis to the present case. The previous order directed the revenue to examine each case relating to deemed notices issued under Section 148 in light of the Supreme Court's observations in *Rajeev Bansal's case* and to determine if the proceedings were time-barred. Cases involving amounts less than Rs. 50,00,000/- were to be dropped, considering the revenue's stand before the Apex Court. The concerned officer was directed to conduct this exercise expeditiously, preferably within two months, and communicate the decision to the assessee as per the faceless regime and Section 144-B. The court rejected the contentions raised before it, noting that recent Supreme Court judgments in *Vikram Kapahi*, *Ashish Acharatlal Varaiya*, and *Pradeep Himatlal Shah* also disposed of SLPs in terms of the *Rajeev Bansal* judgment. The court also noted that in cases where assessees had appealed against final assessment orders, those appeals would stand decided in view of the findings in the *Rajesh Sharma* judgment.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Murari Lal Singhal, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur. The petition challenged certain actions or orders related to income tax proceedings. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer, Ward Tonk, and the Union of India. Both parties agreed that the issue in the present writ petition was governed by a previous order of the same court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14638/2022, titled "Rajesh Sharma versus Income Tax Officer & Anr.", decided on August 21, 2025. This previous order dealt with deemed notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the proceedings initiated by deemed notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, fall within the limitation period or have become time-barred, considering the observations in the Supreme Court's judgment in *Rajeev Bansal's case* and the revenue's stand before the Apex Court regarding cases below Rs. 50,00,000/-. (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on Section 148 and the principles laid down in *Rajeev Bansal*). Assessee's contention: Not explicitly recorded, but the petition implies a challenge to the validity or continuation of proceedings based on the aforementioned Supreme Court judgments. Revenue's contention: Not explicitly recorded, but the revenue's counsel agreed that the matter is governed by the *Rajesh Sharma* case order, which directed the revenue to examine such cases in light of Supreme Court pronouncements.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 144-B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2026:RJ-JP:1444-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14006/2022 Murari Lal Singhal S/o Sh. Dwarka Prasad Singhal, Aged About 65 Years, R/o 02, Krishi Upaj Mandi, Tonk - 304001, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward Tonk, Malpura Gate, Kala Baba, Tonk Rajasthan - 304001 2. Union of India, Through Finance Secretary, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) Central Board Of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Keshav Khandelwal for Mr. Jaideep Malik For Respondent(s) : Ms. Dhairya Agarwal with Mr. Sandeep Pathak HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA

Order 13/01/2026

1.

Both the learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the issue raised in the present writ petition would be governed by the order passed by this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14638/2022 titled as “Rajesh Sharma versus Income Tax Officer & Anr.” and other connected writ petitions decided on 21.08.2025 wherein this Court directed as under:- “5. We accordingly direct the revenue to examine each and every case relating to the deemed notices issued under Section 148 of the Act, in light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal's case (supra) and reach to a conclusion, as to whether the proceedings would fall within the limitation or have become time barred in terms

[2026:RJ-JP:1444-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-14006/2022] of sub-para F, G & H of paragraph No.114 (supra).

6.

While examining the cases, the example as mentioned by the Apex Court in its judgment in Rajeev Bansal’s case (supra) in paragraph No.112 and observations made in paragraph Nos.110 and 111, shall also be taken into consideration. Cases, which fall less than the value of Rs.50,00,000/- would have to be dropped keeping in view the stand taken by the revenue before the Apex Court, as observed in paragraph No.53. 7. The aforesaid exercise shall be conducted by the concerned competent Officer of the Department expeditiously, preferably, within a period of two months without any further delay. The decision shall be conveyed to the assessee in terms of the faceless regime by the concerned Officer keeping in view the provision of Section 144-B of the Act.

8.

In view of the above, the contentions raised [2025]

170 Acharatlal Varaiya, reported in [2024] 168 in [2025] 170 taxmann.com 472 (SC), decided on 20.12.2024, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has also disposed of the Special Leave Petitions in terms of the judgment passed in Rajeev Bansal (supra) with the observation that the Assessing Officer shall dispose of the petitions in terms of the law laid down therein.

9.

We order accordingly. All the petitions stand disposed of. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

10.

If any of the petitioner/assessee is still aggrieved of the order passed, remedy in terms of the provision of the Act can be availed by him.

11.

A copy of this order be placed in each connected file. D.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos.16013/2022, 16144/2022 & 16705/2022:- 1.In view of the decision which has been taken in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14638/2022 and other connected matters (supra), we hold that in cases where the assessee have gone in the appeal against the final assessment order, the said appeals would stand decided in view of the

[2026:RJ-JP:1444-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-14006/2022] observations and findings arrived at hereinabove. The writ petitions are disposed of, accordingly. 2.A copy of this order be placed in the above three writ petitions.”

2.

Keeping in view thereto, the present petition is also disposed of in terms of order dated 21.08.2025 passed in the case of Rajesh Sharma (supra). The observations/directions therein shall apply mutatis mutandis in the present case.

3.

All pending application(s) stand disposed of.

(SANGEETA SHARMA),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ KAVISH /73

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →