MADAN MOHAN GUPTA S/O LATE SHRI NATHU LAL GUPTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/448/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02001544202223 March 2022Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SAMEER JAIN2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petition. The Court noted that the petitioner's counsel submitted that the issue involved was no longer res integra, as it had been decided by a Division Bench of the same Court in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer on 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. Following this precedent, the High Court held that the impugned notice issued in the present case was also invalid and impermissible for the same reasons. Consequently, the impugned notice was quashed and set aside, and the petition was allowed. The ratio decidendi is that if a precedent from a Division Bench of the same High Court has already decided an issue regarding the validity of Section 148 notices, subsequent similar notices should be quashed based on that precedent.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Madan Mohan Gupta, challenged a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner contended that the issue was no longer res integra, citing a previous decision by a Division Bench of the same High Court. This prior decision, rendered on January 27, 2022, in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, had found notices issued under Section 148 to be invalid and impermissible in law and had quashed them. The petitioner argued that the present case was identical to the facts and legal issues decided in Sudesh Taneja. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and the Union of India.

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 Division Bench's decision in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer? Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the issue was no longer res integra. They relied on the Division Bench's decision in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch of petitions) dated 27.01.2022, wherein notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were found to be invalid and impermissible in law and were quashed. The petitioner asserted that the present case was covered by this precedent. 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. 448/2022 Madan Mohan Gupta S/o Late Shri Nathu Lal Gupta, Aged About 72 Years, R/o C-205, Shivashish, Near Dav School, Talwandi, Kota 324005, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota, Cad Colony, Dadabari, Kota. 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. (Uploaded on 31/03/2022 at 01:45:36 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:45:27 AM) (2 of 2) [CW-448/2022] 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 JKP/72 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 31/03/2022 at 01:45:36 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:45:27 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 →