SMT. RAMA GUPTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/9309/2024HC RajasthanRJHC02047963202431 May 2024Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,BHUWAN GOYAL2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court declined to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Court noted that the petitioner did not challenge the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued on March 28, 2023, and instead participated in the reassessment proceedings. The Court found it inappropriate to entertain the challenge to the validity of the notice under Article 226 in these circumstances. The petition was dismissed, but the petitioner was granted liberty to raise all available grounds under the law in challenging the reassessment order, including the reassessment notices, before the appropriate appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Smt. Rama Gupta, legal heir of Late Shri Pramod Kumar Gupta, filed a writ petition challenging a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued on March 28, 2023, and the subsequent reassessment order. The petitioner did not challenge the Section 148 notice at the time it was issued but participated in the reassessment proceedings. The writ petition was filed only after the reassessment order was passed. The respondent, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, argued that the petition should not be entertained as the petitioner had waived their right to challenge the notice by participating in the proceedings, and the issues could be examined by the appellate authority.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition challenging the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the reassessment order is maintainable when the petitioner participated in the reassessment proceedings without challenging the notice initially? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's contention: The petitioner is challenging the validity of the notice and the subsequent reassessment order. Revenue's contention: The petitioner participated in the reassessment proceedings without challenging the Section 148 notice. Therefore, the writ petition should not be entertained, and the issues can be examined by the Appellate Authority.

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. 9309/2024 Smt. Rama Gupta, Aged About 67 Years, Legal Heir of Late Shri Pramod Kuamr Gputa, Resident At 4/1 B Racquet Court Road, Civil Line Delhi 110054 ----Petitioner Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Office of The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4, Jaipur, Room No. 416, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302005. ----Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Soni, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Siddharth Bapna, Advocate HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 31/05/2024 1. Heard. 2. Though notice under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) is under challenge in this petition along with the order of assessment also, we find that the petitioner did not take any remedy against notice under Section 148 of the Act which was issued on 28.03.2023 but participated in the assessment proceedings. It is only after the passing of reassessment order that instant writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent, on an advance copy, would submit that in the circumstances when the petitioner has chosen not to challenge notice under Section 148 of the Act and participated in reassessment proceedings, this petition may not be (Uploaded on 03/06/2024 at 02:29:00 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:41:19 AM)

(2 of 2) [CW-9309/2024] entertained as the issue can be examined even by the Appellate Authority. 4. Taking into consideration the submissions and the circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the matter of challenge to the validity of notice dated 28.03.2023 particularly when the petitioner himself did not challenge the same, but participated in the reassessment proceedings. 5. The petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to take all the grounds which are available to him under the law in the matter of challenge to reassessment order including the reassessment notices. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ MANOJ NARWANI/PAYAL/3 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 03/06/2024 at 02:29:00 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:41:19 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 →