MAHESH DANGAYACH AND SONS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/421/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02001547202223 March 2022Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SAMEER JAIN2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the issue involved in the present petition was no longer res integra, having been decided by a Division Bench of the same Court in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. on January 27, 2022. In that precedent-setting judgment, notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were found to be invalid and impermissible in law and were consequently quashed. Applying the ratio of the Sudesh Taneja case, the High Court found the impugned notice issued to the petitioner to be similarly invalid. Therefore, the impugned notice was quashed and set aside, and the writ petition was allowed. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mahesh Dangayach And Sons, through its Karta Shri Mahesh Dangayach, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The petition challenged a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur, and the Union of India. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the issue was no longer res integra, as a Division Bench of the same Court had already decided a similar matter on January 27, 2022, in the case of Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. In that decision, notices issued under Section 148 were found to be invalid and quashed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the petitioner is invalid and impermissible in law? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the issue concerning the validity of notices under Section 148 has been conclusively decided by a Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch), where such notices were quashed. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue's side. However, by implication, the revenue would have defended the validity of the notice.

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. 421/2022 Mahesh Dangayach And Sons, Through Its Karta Shri Mahesh Dangayach, S/o Shri Rameshwar Lal Dangayach, Aged About 61 Years, R/o B-81, Anandpuri, M D Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur Ncr Building, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur. 2. Union Of India, Through Finance Secretary, Ministry Of Finance (Department Of Revenue), Central Board Of Direct Taxes, North Block, New Delhi 110002 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra for Mr. Gunjan Pathak For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nikhil Simlote HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 23/03/2022 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 (Uploaded on 31/03/2022 at 01:45:07 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:45:29 AM) (2 of 2) [CW-421/2022] 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 JKP/74 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 31/03/2022 at 01:45:07 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:45:29 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 →