SHRI RAJESH CHOUDHARY S/O SHRI GANGA RAM CHOUDHARY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE

PDF · subscribers
CW/3669/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02017282202210 March 2022Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SAMEER JAIN1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the writ petition. The Court noted the submission of the petitioner's counsel that the issue was squarely covered by the Division Bench's decision in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. In that precedent, notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were found to be invalid and impermissible in law and were quashed. Applying the same reasoning and precedent to the present case, the High Court quashed and set aside the impugned notice issued to the petitioner. The operative direction was to quash the notice and allow the petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shri Rajesh Choudhary, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench. The petition challenged a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 7 (2), Jaipur. The assessment year(s) are not specified in the judgment. The procedural history is limited to the filing of the writ petition and the subsequent submission by the petitioner's counsel.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is invalid and impermissible in law. Assessee's contention: The petitioner's counsel argued that the issue is no longer res integra, as a Division Bench of the same High Court, in its decision dated 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), had already held notices issued under Section 148 to be invalid and impermissible in law and quashed them. Therefore, the present notice should also be quashed on the same grounds. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from 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. 3669/2022 Shri Rajesh Choudhary S/o Shri Ganga Ram Choudhary, aged about 38 years, R/o 42 Ward No. 12, Saipura Sanganer Jaipur, Rajasthan 302029 ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Office, Ward 7 (2) Jyoti Nagar Scheme, Sidhnath Bhawan, Behind New Vidhan Sabha, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302015 ----Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Devang Gargieya Advocate on behalf of Mr. Mahendra Gargieya Advocate. HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 10/03/2022 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. (SAMEER JAIN),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ MANOJ NARWANI /216 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 15/03/2022 at 04:27:50 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:03:07 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 →