SHIMBHU DAYAL GARG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/5111/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02025113202204 April 2022Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,BIRENDRA KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, in its decision dated 04/04/2022, allowed the writ petition. The Court noted the submission of the petitioner's counsel that no final order of assessment had been passed. Crucially, the Court acknowledged that the issue of the validity of notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, had been settled 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). Following the precedent set in Sudesh Taneja, where such notices were declared invalid and quashed, the High Court held that the impugned notice in the present case was also invalid and impermissible in law. Consequently, the notice was quashed and set aside, and the petition was allowed. The operative direction was to quash the notice and allow the petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shimbhu Dayal Garg, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner contended that no final order of assessment had been passed by the Assessing Authority. The petitioner's counsel further argued that the issue concerning the validity of notices issued under Section 148 had already been decided by a Division Bench of the same High Court in a previous case, Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr., where such notices 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, is invalid and impermissible in law, considering the ratio laid down in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. (Petitioner's contention). 2. Whether the impugned notice should be quashed and set aside (Petitioner's contention). The Revenue did not record any specific arguments in the judgment.

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.5111/2022 Shimbhu Dayal Garg, (A.Y. 2016-17) S/o Shri Gyarshi Lal Garg, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Jatin Plywood And Glass Agencies, National Highway 8, Kotputli, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 303108. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward - Neem Ka Thana, Near Santoshi Mata Mandir, Chhawani Road, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar, Rajasthan - 332713. 2. Union Of India, Though Its Secretary, Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi (NCT)-110001 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vedant Agarwal, Advocate HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 04/04/2022 At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that so far no final order of assessment has been passed by the Assessing Authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 07/04/2022 at 05:35:08 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:44:55 AM) (2 of 2) [CW-5111/2022] 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 Karan/4 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 07/04/2022 at 05:35:08 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:44:55 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 →