MAHENDRA VERMA S/O LATE KANHAIYALAL VERMA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/12467/2025HC RajasthanRJHC02068546202516 September 2025Author: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANJEET PUROHIT2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 153(C) cannot be objected to, and the objections raised by the petitioner were rightly rejected by the authorities. The Court reasoned that the petitioner had previously challenged reassessment proceedings under Section 148, arguing that Section 153(C) should have been invoked. This Court, in its judgment dated March 19, 2024, quashed the Section 148 proceedings and explicitly granted liberty to the respondent-Tax Authorities to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law. Therefore, the challenge on the ground of limitation or maintainability of proceedings under Section 153(C) would not arise, as it was at the petitioner's instance that the liberty to proceed was granted. The Court found no reason to interfere with the Section 153(C) notice, but clarified that the petitioner is free to raise all necessary arguments and defenses before the authorities, who must pass a speaking order.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mahendra Verma, is challenging a notice issued under Section 153(C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated January 16, 2025, for Assessment Year 2013-2014, and the disposal of objections against reassessment proceedings dated July 14, 2025. The petitioner had previously filed a writ petition (W.P. No. 2386/2022) challenging proceedings initiated under Section 148, arguing that Section 153(C) should have been invoked. This Court quashed the Section 148 proceedings on March 19, 2024, granting liberty to the authorities to proceed in accordance with law. The current writ petition challenges the subsequent Section 153(C) notice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 153(C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated January 16, 2025, for Assessment Year 2013-2014 is maintainable against the petitioner. Assessee's Contention: The Senior Counsel for the petitioner argued that the Section 153(C) notice was not maintainable and that the twin satisfaction of the Assessing Officer (AO) was not recorded. Ancillary arguments were also raised. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the respondent revenue. However, it notes that the Court had previously granted liberty to the respondent-Tax Authorities to proceed against the writ petitioner in accordance with law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153(C),Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2025:RJ-JP:37762-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12467/2025 Mahendra Verma S/o Late Kanhaiyalal Verma, Aged About 73 Years, R/o A-207-208, Nagar Residency, Near Rungta Hospital, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur 302017, Through Power Of Attorney Holder Vinod Bamalwa, Son Of Late Madan Lal Bamalwa, Aged About 51 Years, Residing At 9/1 Lower Rawdon Street, L.R. Sarani S.O. Kolkata West Bengal 700020. ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 4 Jaipur, Income Tax, New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302005 ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Prakul Khurana and Mr. Rajat Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna with Mr. Meyhul Mittal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT

Order 16/09/2025

1.

The challenge is to the notice issued under Section 153(C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 16.01.2025 for the Assessment Year 2013-2014 and the disposal of the objections against reassessment proceedings order dated 14.07.2025. 2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the notice was not maintainable against the petitioner under Section 153(C) and twin satisfaction of the AO were not recorded. He has also raised other ancillary arguments. We notice that the petitioner had earlier preferred a

[2025:RJ-JP:37762-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-12467/2025] writ petition No.2386/2022, wherein he challenged the proceedings initiated under Section 148 against the argument advanced that the proceedings should have been initiated under Section 153(C). Accordingly, this Court quashed the proceedings initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act vide judgment dated 19.03.2024 with liberty to the authorities to proceed against the writ petitioner in accordance with law. Since, the Court granted permission to the respondent- Tax Authorities to proceed, the challenge on the ground of limitation would not arise, now as it was at the instance of the petitioner that the order was passed by this Court granting liberty to the authorities to proceed.

3.

In view thereto, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 153(C) cannot be objected, the objections have been rightly rejected by the authorities.

4.

We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the notice issued under Section 153(C), however, the petitioner is free to take up all the necessary arguments and defence available to him before the authorities who would of course pass an appropriate speaking order.

5.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is dismissed. Pending appreciation(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J GAURAV/AVINASH/20

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →