RAM CHANDRA DOLANI (A.Y. 2013-14) S/O LATE SHRI MOOL CHANDRA DOLANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/5116/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02025177202204 April 2022Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,BIRENDRA KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the present case were invalid and impermissible in law. The Court's reasoning was based on its prior decision in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. dated January 27, 2022. In that judgment, the Division Bench had found similar notices to be invalid and quashed them. Applying the same reasoning, the High Court in the present case quashed and set aside the impugned notice issued to the petitioner. The operative direction was to quash the notice and allow the petition. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ram Chandra Dolani, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2013-14. The petitioner contended that the final assessment order had not yet been passed. The petitioner argued that the issue of the validity of Section 148 notices was no longer res integra, citing a previous decision by a Division Bench of the same High Court in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. dated January 27, 2022, where similar notices were quashed. The respondents, the Income Tax Officer and the Union of India, were represented by counsel.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are invalid and impermissible in law, turning on the interpretation and application of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were invalid and impermissible in law. This contention was based on the precedent set by the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch), which had quashed similar notices. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue's counsel in response to the petitioner's arguments.

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. 5116/2022 Ram Chandra Dolani (A.Y. 2013-14) S/o Late Shri Mool Chandra Dolani, Aged About 58 Years, R/o 2/112, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302016. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(2), New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302005. 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 05:27:10 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:44:58 AM) (2 of 2) [CW-5116/2022] 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 /21 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 05/04/2022 at 05:27:10 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:44:58 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 →