RAM KARAN DAS CHELA SHRI HARBHAJAN DAS S/O BHURA DAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/3283/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02015738202203 March 2022Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,ANOOP KUMAR DHAND1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petition. The Court noted the submission of the petitioner's counsel that the issue was no longer res integra, citing the Division Bench's decision in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch) dated January 27, 2022. In that precedent, notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were held to be invalid and impermissible in law and were quashed. Applying the same reasoning, the High Court quashed and set aside the impugned notice issued in the present case. The operative direction was to quash the notice and allow the petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ram Karan Das Chela Shri Harbhajan Das, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench. The petition challenged a notice issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Jaipur. The petitioner's counsel stated that the issue was already decided by a Division Bench of the same court on January 27, 2022, in the case of Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch). In that decision, notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were held to be invalid and quashed. Based on this precedent, the petitioner sought similar relief.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is invalid and impermissible in law? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the issue involved in the present petition is no longer res integra. They relied on the Division Bench decision of the High Court dated January 27, 2022, in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch), wherein notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were found to be invalid and quashed. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3283/2022 Ram Karan Das Chela Shri Harbhajan Das S/o Bhura Das, Village Nimeda, Tehsil Phagi, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Jaipur, Rajasthan through Income Tax Officer, having its Address at office of The Income Tax Officer Ward -7(2), Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta Advocate. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 03/03/2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset would submit that the issue involved in this petition is no longer res integra as it has been put to an end by Division Bench of this Court in the decision rendered on 27.01.2022 in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(3) & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch of petitions) where the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 have been found to be invalid and impermissible in law and quashed. In view of the above statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned notice issued in the present case, for the reasons stated in the order dated 27.01.2022 passed in the aforesaid cases, is also quashed and set aside and the petition is allowed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J MANOJ NARWANI /45 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 11/03/2022 at 05:42:12 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:46:03 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 →