SUMAN CHOUDHARY D/O LUMBA RAM SAHARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/4414/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02021462202222 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, as it had been decided by a Division Bench of the same 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) on January 27, 2022. In that decision, notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were found to be invalid and impermissible in law and were consequently quashed. Following this precedent, the High Court quashed and set aside the impugned notice issued to the petitioner in the present case. The petition was allowed. The ratio decidendi is that if a similar issue has been decided by a higher bench of the same court, subsequent petitions raising the same issue should be decided in line with the precedent, leading to the quashing of the impugned notices.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Suman Choudhary, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent was the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Jaipur. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the issue was no longer debatable, citing a previous Division Bench 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 decision, notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were held to be invalid and impermissible in law and were quashed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is invalid and impermissible in law, considering the precedent set by the Division Bench in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the present case is covered by the Division Bench's decision in Sudesh Taneja, which held notices under Section 148 to be invalid and quashed them. Therefore, the impugned notice in this petition should also be quashed. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the 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.4414/2022 Suman Choudhary D/o Lumba Ram Saharan, 92, Jambeshwar Nagar, Queens Road, Jaipur 302001, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (3), Jaipur Having Its Address At Office Of The Income Tax Officer Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3) ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate Mr. Ashok Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Bhatti, Advocate for Mr. Anuroop Singhi, Advocate HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 22/03/2022 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 (Uploaded on 28/03/2022 at 12:56:58 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:03:00 AM) (2 of 2) [CW-4414/2022] aforesaid cases, is also quashed and set aside and the petition is allowed. (SAMEER JAIN),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ Karan/23 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 28/03/2022 at 12:56:58 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:03:00 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 →