RAJVEER COMMERCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

CW/12347/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02066995202218 August 2025Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANJEET PUROHIT3 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petition. The Court noted that the issue had been adjudicated by the Supreme Court in Deepak Steel And Power Limited Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes & Ors., which relied on the Revenue's concession in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal. The Revenue had conceded that for Assessment Year 2015-2016, all notices issued on or after April 1, 2021, would have to be dropped as they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020. Since the notices in the present litigation were dated June 25, 2021, and July 27, 2022, and considering the concession and the co-ordinate bench's view that limitation for AY 2015-16 expired on March 31, 2022, the Court held that the proceedings continued by the Revenue deserved to be quashed as time-barred. The operative direction was to quash the proceedings.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Rajveer Commerce Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging certain actions of the Income Tax Department. The respondents are the Income Tax Department and the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The petitioner sought relief concerning assessment year 2015-16. The High Court heard an application for amendment of the cause title, which was allowed. Both parties submitted that the issue had been adjudicated by the Supreme Court in Deepak Steel And Power Limited Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes & Ors. The Supreme Court's decision referenced a concession made by the Revenue in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal, concerning notices issued after April 1, 2021, for assessment year 2015-2016. The petitioner's notice in this case was dated June 25, 2021, and a subsequent notice was issued on July 27, 2022.

What were the issues?

1. Whether proceedings initiated by the Revenue for Assessment Year 2015-16 are barred by limitation, considering the provisions of the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA)? Assessee's Contention: The assessee relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Deepak Steel And Power Limited Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes & Ors., which in turn relied on the Revenue's concession in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal. This concession stated that for Assessment Year 2015-2016, all notices issued on or after April 1, 2021, would have to be dropped as they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed under TOLA. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its concession before the Supreme Court in the cited case, agreed that notices issued after April 1, 2021, for AY 2015-16 were time-barred. The High Court also referred to a co-ordinate bench's decision in Late Shri Rafiq Ahmed Qureshi Vs. CBDT & Anr., which held that the limitation for AY 2015-16 expired on March 31, 2022, relying on the Rajeev Bansal judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JP:32154-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12347/2022 Rajveer Commerce Private Limited, having its registered office at A-19 NULITE Colony Tonk Road, Jaipur, 302015, Rajasthan, through its authorized representative Kamal Prakash Rathi s/o late Shri Gopi Kishan Rathi, aged about 64 years, r/o A-19 NULITE colony, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Office Of The Income Tax Department, Ito Ward 6(3), New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302005 2. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Through Chairperson, Type-7, Bungalow No. 75, New Moti Bagh, New Delhi 110021 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajat Sharma with Mr. Saksham Pandey For Respondent(s) : Ms. Jaya P. Pathak on behalf of Mr. Sandeep Pathak HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 18/08/2025 1. Heard on application (No.1/2025). 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. Amended cause title is taken on record. 3. Both the counsels, at this stage, submit that the issue raised in the present petition stands finally adjudicated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5718 of 2025- Deepak Steel And Power Limited Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes & Ors., decided on 02.04.2025. (Uploaded on 25/08/2025 at 04:28:46 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:38:32 AM) [2025:RJ-JP:32154-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-12347/2022] 4. Learned counsels have invited our attention to the concessions made by the Revenue, as noted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which read as under: “4. The learned counsel appearing for the revenue with his usual fairness invited the attention of this Court to a three judge bench decision of this Court in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2693, more particularly, paragraph 19(f) which reads thus:- “19. (f) The Revenue concedes that for the assessment year 2015-2016, all notices issued on or after April 1, 2021 will have to be dropped as they will not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the Taxation and other Law (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.” 5. As the revenue made a concession in the aforesaid decision that is for the assessment year 2015-2016, all notices issued on or after 1st April, 2021 will have to be dropped as they would not fall for completion during the period prescribed under the taxation and other laws (Relaxation and Amendment of certain Provisions Act, 2020). Nothing further is required to be adjudicated in this matter as the notices so far as the present litigation is concerned is dated 25.6.2021. 6.

view

the

aforesaid,

such circumstances referred to above the original writ petition nos.2446 of 2023, 2543 of 2023 and 2544 of 2023 respectively filed before the High Court of Orissa at cuttack stands allowed.” 5. Counsels have also invited our attention to the order dated 27.01.2025 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3667/2023- Late Shri Rafiq Ahmed Qureshi Vs. CBDT & Anr., where the issue with regard to limitation for Assessment Year 2015-16 was examined and relying on the view taken in the case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Rajeev Bansal reported in (2024) 469 ITR 46, it was held that the same would expire on 31.03.2022. (Uploaded on 25/08/2025 at 04:28:46 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:38:32 AM) [2025:RJ-JP:32154-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-12347/2022] 6. In the present case, the second notice was issued on 27.07.2022. Considering the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (TOLA), we are of the view that the proceedings continued by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2015-16 deserve to be quashed, holding it to be time barred. 7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. No costs. 8. All pending applications also stand disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J RAHUL MIRKHANI/51 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 25/08/2025 at 04:28:46 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:38:32 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →