SHWETA PRATAP SINGH PARIHAR W/O SHRI RAVINDRA PRATAP SINGH PARIHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
CW/13528/2021HC RajasthanRJHC02076936202127 October 2026Author: INDERJEET SINGH,SANGEETA SHARMA3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, with the consent of both parties, heard all the petitions together. The Court noted the submission from the Revenue that no demand had been raised against the petitioners pursuant to the order dated September 30, 2021, and that assessment orders had already been passed. Considering these facts, the Court deemed it just and proper to dismiss all the petitions. The Court granted liberty to the petitioners to avail appropriate legal remedies if the special audit report under challenge is used against them for any other assessment year. The ratio decidendi is that a writ petition challenging a procedural order like a special audit direction may not be maintainable when the substantive assessment has been completed without raising a demand based on that specific order, and the petitioners are adequately protected by liberty to challenge any future adverse use of the report.

What were the facts?

These are five connected writ petitions filed by various assessees, including Ravi Surya Traders India Private Limited, Shweta Pratap Singh Parihar, Sushila Devi Parihar, Paushak Impex Private Limited, and Reliable Craft Private Limited. The petitioners are challenging an order dated September 30, 2021, passed by the Income Tax Department under Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning a special audit report. The respondents are the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur. During the proceedings, the Revenue stated that no demand has been raised against the petitioners pursuant to the impugned order, and assessment orders have already been passed. The petitioners' counsel expressed concern that the special audit report might be used against them for other assessment years.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petitions challenging the order dated 30.09.2021 passed under Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are maintainable when assessment orders have already been passed and no demand has been raised against the petitioners pursuant to the special audit order. Assessee's Contention: The petitioners are concerned that the special audit report, which is the subject of the challenge, could be used against them for other assessment years, implying a potential future grievance. They seek to challenge the order under Section 142(2A) at this stage. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue submitted that no demand has been raised against the petitioners pursuant to the order dated 30.09.2021, and the assessment orders have already been passed by the Assessing Authority. This suggests that the immediate grievance, if any, related to the assessment itself has been addressed, and the challenge is to a procedural step.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(2A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2026:RJ-JP:43591-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13527/2021 CNR: RJHC020772892021 | URN: CW / 29856U / 2021 Ravi Surya Traders India Private Limited, E-172A, Uttam Tower, Ramesh Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Authorised Signatory Ravindra Pratap Singh Parihar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 3 Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13528/2021 CNR: RJHC020769362021 | URN: CW / 29857U / 2021 Shweta Pratap Singh Parihar W/o Shri Ravindra Pratap Singh Parihar, Aged About 40 Years, R/o P-28, Raj Aangan, Nri Colony, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 3 Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13537/2021 CNR: RJHC020768892021 | URN: CW / 29888U / 2021 Sushila Devi Parihar W/o Late Shri Bhagwan Singh Parihar, Aged About 65 Years, R/o K-47-48, Himmat Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302001 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 3 Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13540/2021 CNR: RJHC020772982021 | URN: CW / 29894U / 2021 Paushak Impex Private Limited, K-47-48, Himmat Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur Through Authorised Signatory Ravindra Pratap [2026:RJ-JP:43591-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-13527/2021] Singh Parihar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 3 Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13542/2021 CNR: RJHC020773142021 | URN: CW / 29896U / 2021 Reliable Craft Private Limited, K-48, Himmat Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur Through Authorised Signatory Ravindra Pratap Singh Parihar ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 3 Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax(Central),jaipur, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gunjan Pathak. Mr. Aditya Bohra. Ms. Ishita Rawat. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna. Mr. Rahul Kumar. Ms. Tanushka Saxena. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA

Order 27/10/2026 With the consent of both the parties, all these petitions have been heard together. These petitions have been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 30.09.2021 passed by the Department under

[2026:RJ-JP:43591-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-13527/2021] Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with regard to Special Audit report. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the Department on instructions submits that no demand has been raised by the Department against the petitioners pursuant to the order dated 30.09.2021 and in all these matters the assessment order has already been passed by the Assessing Authority. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the Department can use the Special Audit report against the petitioners for any other assessment year. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. Since, the assessment orders have already been passed by the Department against the petitioners in which no demand has been raised by them against the petitioners, we deem it just and proper to dismissed all the petitions. The petitions are accordingly dismissed. Liberty is granted to the petitioners that in case Special Audit report under challenge in the present petitions is used against the petitioners for any other assessment year, they can avail appropriate legal remedy. Copy of the order be placed in each connected file. (SANGEETA SHARMA),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J 13-18 (Except -16) MG/A

More judgments on Section 142(2A)

All 676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(2A) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →