PANKAJ KUMAR GARG HUF vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

PDF · subscribers
CW/16255/2025HC RajasthanRJHC02088972202516 December 2025Author: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANGEETA SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court acknowledged that the petitioner had raised grievances regarding the jurisdiction of the issuing officer under the faceless scheme and that a final order had been passed, with an appeal pending before the Appellate Authority. The Court had previously directed the petitioner to raise these issues before the Appellate Authority. Considering that proceedings under Section 270/274 of the Income Tax Act had been initiated and in light of a previous order by a Coordinate Bench in a similar matter, the Court deemed it appropriate to stay the impugned notices dated 01.05.2025 and 07.05.2025. The Court also directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner until the appeal is decided. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar Garg HUF, through its Karta, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The petition challenged notices issued by the Income Tax Department. It was stated that the original notice was issued by an officer lacking jurisdiction under the new faceless scheme. However, the Court had previously not intervened as a final order had been passed and an appeal was preferred before the Appellate Authority. The petitioner was advised to raise grievances before the Appellate Authority. Subsequently, proceedings under Section 270/274 of the Income Tax Act were initiated. The Court noted a previous order dated 06.12.2025 in a similar writ petition filed by the same petitioner.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notices dated 01.05.2025 and 07.05.2025, issued by the respondents, are valid, considering the petitioner's grievance regarding the jurisdiction of the issuing officer under the faceless scheme and the pendency of an appeal before the Appellate Authority? (Question of law and fact, concerning procedural fairness and jurisdictional validity). Assessee's Contention: The original notice was issued by an officer who lacked jurisdiction under the new faceless scheme. The petitioner had already preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority and was directed to raise grievances there. Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270,Section 274

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2025:RJ-JP:50701-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16255/2025 Pankaj Kumar Garg Huf, R/o Ax-205, Ashiana Gulmohar Park, Vasundhara Nagar Bhiwadi, Alwar 301019 Rajasthan Through Karta Pankaj Kumar Garg S/o Shri Ram Kumar Garg. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Room No. 401, 2Nd Floor, E- Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Delhi- 110003. 2. Union Of India, Under Secretary To The Government Of India, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi- 110001. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Priyesh Kasliwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Nitin Jain, Adv. with Ms.Kirti Kalawatiya, Adv. HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA

Order 16/12/2025

1.

Issue notice.

2.

Learned counsel Mr.Nitin Jain accepts notice for respondents.

3.

It is stated that the original notice has been issued by the JAO who did not have the juri iction in view of new faceless scheme having come into operation, however, this Court did not intervene as the final order had been passed and the appeal has also been preferred before the Appellate Authority. In view thereto, this Court observed that the petitioner would be free to move an appropriate application raising his grievance before the

[2025:RJ-JP:50701-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-16255/2025] Appellate Authority and they will pass an order within a period of fifteen days. In the meanwhile, it is stated that the respondents have initiated the proceedings under Section 270/274 of the Income Tax Act.

4.

Considering the aforesaid, we deem it appropriate to stay the impugned notices dated 01.05.2025 and 07.05.2025 passed by the respondents till further orders and we direct that no coercive steps shall be taken till the appeal is decided as the Coordinate Bench of this Court has already passed the order dated 06.12.2025 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16591/2025 (Pankaj Kumar Garg Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.).

5.

In view of the above, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

6.

All pending applications stand disposed of. (SANGEETA SHARMA),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Himanshu Soni/25

More judgments on Section 270

All 27 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →