SHREE CEMENT LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/11305/2024HC RajasthanRJHC02058374202405 August 2025Bench: K.R. SHRIRAM,ANAND SHARMA3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal quashed and set aside the notice dated 3rd May 2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the order dated 3rd May 2024 issued under Section 148A(d) of the Act. This decision was based on the concession made by the Revenue that the notice was invalid, aligning with the Court's prior ruling in Shree Cement Limited. The Court, however, kept open all rights and contentions of both parties to be agitated if the Hon'ble Apex Court were to interfere with the decision of the High Court of Bombay in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. The operative direction was to quash the impugned notice and order, effectively allowing the petition on the ground of invalid notice, while preserving the Revenue's right to pursue the matter further based on future Supreme Court pronouncements.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shree Cement Limited, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated May 3, 2024, issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and an order dated May 3, 2024, issued under Section 148A(d) of the Act. The petitioner argued that, similar to a previous case involving the same petitioner, the notice was invalid because it was issued by the JAO and not a Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). The Revenue acknowledged that the Court had previously held such notices to be invalid in the case of Shree Cement Limited. The Revenue requested that the petition be disposed of on this ground, but with the understanding that their rights and contentions would be preserved should the Supreme Court rule in their favor in a related case concerning Hexaware Technologies Ltd.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice dated 3rd May 2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) is invalid. (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the notice is invalid, relying on a previous decision in Shree Cement Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Others, which held that notices issued by JAOs, rather than Faceless Assessing Officers (FAOs), are invalid. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue conceded that the Court had previously held such notices to be invalid. They requested the petition be disposed of on this basis, but with the condition that their rights and contentions be kept open to be revived if the Supreme Court overturns the Bombay High Court's decision in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 148A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JP:30124-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11305/2024 Shree Cement Limited, having Its Office at Bangur Nagur, Andheri Deori, Masuda Road, Beawar, Ajmer-305901, Rajasthan through Its Joint President Shri Arvind Khicha, S/o Shri Indermal Khicha, Aged About 60 Years R/o 5-6, Nanesh Nagar, Near Jawahar Bhawan, Vinod Nagar, Beawar, Rajasthan - 305901 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, Cr Building, Opp. Sessions Court, Jaipur Road, Ajmer, Rajasthan- 305001 2. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Aaykar Bhawan, Subcity Centre, Savina, Udaipur, Rajasthan - 313001 3. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi -II, LIC Building, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302005 4. Director General of Income Tax (Investigation), New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302005 5. Union of India, through The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi - 110001 ----Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Percy Pardiwala, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anant Kasliwal, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Niraj Sheth Advocate, Mr. Shashank Kasliwal Advocate, Mr. Raghav Krishnatri Advocate, Mr. Diwakar Khaldwa Advocate & Ms. Divisha Misra Advocate. For Respondents No. 1 and 2 : Mr. Siddharth Bapna Advocate with Mr. Sarvesh Jain Advocate, Mr. Meyhul Miittal Advocate & Mr. Rahul Kumar Advocate. (Uploaded on 10/08/2025 at 10:05:34 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:38:36 AM)

[2025:RJ-JP:30124-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-11305/2024] HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 05/08/2025 1. Mr. Percy Pardiwala, Senior Advocate appearing for petitioner states that except issue of limitation that was raised in Shree Cement Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Others1, other four issues will arise in this petition as well. Mr. Siddharth Bapna, counsel for Revenue, in fairness, stated that since in this case also, there is notice dated 3rd May 2024 issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) and this Court has held in Shree Cement Limited (supra) that such a notice will be invalid, the Court may dispose this petition holding that notice is invalid, but keeping open all rights and contentions of Revenue to rekindle the notice in case the Hon'ble Supreme Court holds in favour of Revenue in the petition filed against the decision of High Court of Bombay in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 15(1)(2)2. 2. Mr. Percy Pardiwala, Senior Advocate stated all rights and contentions should be kept open to be agitated in such an eventuality. 3. If the Hon'ble Apex Court interferes in the decision of High Court of Bombay in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. (supra), parties may rekindle all issues. Keeping open all rights and contentions of the parties, notice dated 3rd May 2024 issued under 1 D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10540/2024, dated 05th August 2025 2 [2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay) (Uploaded on 10/08/2025 at 10:05:34 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:38:36 AM)

[2025:RJ-JP:30124-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-11305/2024] Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as also order dated 3rd May 2024 issued under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are quashed and set aside. 4. Petition allowed. (ANAND SHARMA),J (K.R. SHRIRAM),CJ MANOJ NARWANI-DAKSH /2(F) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 10/08/2025 at 10:05:34 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:38:36 AM)

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →