ASHOK KUMAR DUSAD S/O SHRI RAM SHARAN DUSAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/2760/2020HC RajasthanRJHC02013671202005 July 2024Author: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the present writ petitions should be disposed of in terms of the decision of this Court dated April 18, 2024, in the case of Siddharth Totuka vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (DBCWP No.13424/2021). This decision, in turn, followed the Court's earlier ruling in Shyam Sunder Khandelwal vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18363/2019) and connected petitions. The Court's reasoning, as indicated by the agreement of the parties and the reference to prior judgments, was that the identical facts warranted the same outcome. The ratio decidendi is that where facts are identical to those in a precedent-setting judgment of the same court, the same relief should be granted. The operative direction was to allow the writ petitions, quashing the notices under Section 148 and the assessment orders. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Ranjeet Birani, Chandra Prakash Agroya, and Ashok Kumar Dusad, filed writ petitions challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, and subsequent assessment orders. The assessment year in question for Ranjeet Birani is 2012-13. The petitioners' counsel and the revenue's counsel agreed that the facts of these cases are identical to those in DBCWP No.13424/2021 (Siddharth Totuka vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax), which was decided on April 18, 2024. The Siddharth Totuka case, in turn, followed the decision of this Court in Shyam Sunder Khandelwal vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18363/2019) and connected petitions. The present petitions were thus disposed of in line with these prior decisions.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, and the consequent assessment order are liable to be quashed, considering the facts are identical to prior judgments of this Court. (Question of law and fact) Assessee's Contentions: The petitioners argued that the facts of their cases are identical to the facts in Siddharth Totuka vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (DBCWP No.13424/2021) and Shyam Sunder Khandelwal vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.18363/2019) and connected petitions. They relied on the decisions in these cases, which allowed the writ petitions. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue's counsel agreed that the facts of the present cases are similar to the cited precedents. They did not present any independent arguments against the petitioners' claim, implicitly accepting the applicability of the prior judgments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2024:RJ-JP:28110-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2360/2020 Ranjeet Birani S/o Shri Ratan Lal, Aged About 58 Years, B-89, Shubham, Ganesh Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), New Central Revenue Building, Janpath, Jaipur. ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 357/2020 Chandra Prakash Agroya S/o Late Shri Bansilal Agroya, Aged About 70 Years, D-46/b, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 (2), New Central Revenue Building, Janpath, Jaipur. ----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2760/2020 Ashok Kumar Dusad S/o Shri Ram Sharan Dusad, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of K-08, Malviya Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-04, New Central Revenue Building, Janpath, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dileep Shivpuri with Mr. Utkarsh Shara For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna Mr. Sarvesh Jain Ms. Kriti Kalawatia Mr. Meyhul Mittal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR [2024:RJ-JP:28110-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-2360/2020]

Order 05/07/2024 This petition is filed seeking quashing of notice issued under Section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2012-13 and the assessment order.

Learned counsel for the parties are at ad idem that the facts of the present case are similar to that of DBCWP No.13424/2021 (Siddharth Totuka vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax)

Writ Petition No.18363/2019) and connected petitions.

The petitions are disposed of in terms of the decision of this Court dated 18.04.2024 passed in the case of Siddharth Totuka (supra). (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Simple Kumawat /29-31

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →