MUKESH KUMAR NAD (A.Y. 2016-17) S/O SHRI SHARWAN KUMAR NAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/5115/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02025102202204 April 2022Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,BIRENDRA KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the petition. It quashed and set aside the impugned notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court's decision was based on the submission made by the petitioner's counsel that the issue was no longer res integra and had been decided by a Division Bench of the same Court in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. In that precedent, notices issued under Section 148 were found to be invalid and impermissible in law and were consequently quashed. The High Court applied the same reasoning to the present case, thereby granting relief to the petitioner. No specific amount in dispute was recorded. The Court did not leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Mukesh Kumar Nad, filed a writ petition challenging a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2016-17. The petitioner contended that no final assessment order had been passed to date. The petitioner argued that the issue was settled by a previous decision of the same High Court in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch), where notices issued under Section 148 were held to be invalid and impermissible in law and were quashed. The respondents, the Income Tax Officer and the Union of India, were represented by 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, turning on the interpretation of Section 148 and relevant case law. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the notice under Section 148 was invalid and impermissible in law, relying on the Division Bench decision in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr., which had quashed similar notices. The petitioner also stated that no final assessment order had been passed. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue's counsel on the merits of the case. However, counsel for the respondents entered appearance and received advance copy of the petition.

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. 5115/2022 Mukesh Kumar Nad (A.Y. 2016-17) S/o Shri Sharwan Kumar Nad, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Subhash Mandi, Neem Ka Thana, Sikar, Rajasthan - 332713. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 36(1), Aaykar Bhawan, 110 Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata, West Bengal - 700107. 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 : Mr. Vedant Agrawal Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Nikhil Simlote Advocate. HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 04/04/2022 Mr. Nikhil Simlote, learned counsel enters appearance on behalf of the respondents. Advance copy of the petition has been supplied to learned counsel for the respondents. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that till date, final assessment order has not been passed. 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 (Uploaded on 05/04/2022 at 05:26:45 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:02:18 AM) (2 of 2) [CW-5115/2022] 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 /20 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 05/04/2022 at 05:26:45 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:02:18 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 →