AMAR CHAND SON OF SHRI NAND LAL SHARMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the writ petition is finally disposed of in terms of the order dated 04.05.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal. The Supreme Court's directions, which are applicable PAN India, were to the effect that impugned Section 148 notices issued under the unamended Act shall be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A and construed as show-cause notices. The Assessing Officer is to provide information within thirty days, and assessees have two weeks to reply. The requirement of enquiry under Section 148A(a) is dispensed with as a one-time measure. The Assessing Officer shall then pass orders under Section 148A(d) and, thereafter, may issue notice under the substituted Section 148. All defences available to the assessees, including under Section 149, and all rights and contentions of both parties under the Finance Act, 2021, shall continue to be available. The authorities concerned are directed to proceed in accordance with these directions. The stay application also stands disposed of.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Amar Chand, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, challenging notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent is the Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2), Jaipur. The petitioner contended that the issue in his petition was covered by a recent Supreme Court order. The Supreme Court, in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal, had passed directions regarding notices issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were subject to challenge before various High Courts. The High Court noted that the Supreme Court's order was applicable PAN India and would govern pending writ petitions.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the impugned Section 148 notices issued to the assessee, which were issued under the unamended Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, shall be deemed to have been issued under Section 148A of the Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021, and construed as show-cause notices under Section 148A(b)? - Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the issue raised in his petition is covered by the Supreme Court's order in Ashish Agarwal. - Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. 2. Whether the requirement of conducting an enquiry under Section 148A(a) is dispensed with as a one-time measure for notices issued under the unamended Section 148 from 01.04.2021 till date? - Petitioner's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. - Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. 3. Whether all defences available to the assessees under Section 149 of the IT Act and other rights and contentions under the Finance Act, 2021, shall continue to be available? - Petitioner's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. - Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5888/2022 Amar Chand Son Of Shri Nand Lal Sharma, Aged About 83 Years, Having Address At 22, Village & Post Rampura Dabri, Bunkaron Ka Mohalla, Vaya Jaitpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India - 303704 ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2), Jaipur Having Its Address At Sidhnath Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar Scheme, Lal Kothi Scheme, Behind New Vidhansabha, Janpath, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India 302015 ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shankar Lal Poddar, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 10/05/2022 When this case came up for hearing today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue raised in this petition is covered by order dated 04.05.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Others Vs. Ashish Agarwal (Civil Appeal No. 3005/2022 and batch of appeals). Following directions have been issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case: “10. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Appeals are ALLOWED IN PART. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in W.T. No. 524/2021 and other allied tax appeals/petitions, is/are hereby modified and substituted as under:-
(2 of 3) [CW-5888/2022] (i) The impugned section 148 notices issued to the respective assessees which were issued under unamended section 148 of the IT Act, which were the subject matter of writ petitions before the various respective High Courts shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148A of the IT Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show-cause notices in terms of section 148A(b). The assessing officer shall, within thirty days from today provide to the respective assessees information and material relied upon by the Revenue, so that the assessees can reply to the show-cause notices within two weeks thereafter; (ii) The requirement of conducting any enquiry, if required, with the prior approval of specified authority under section 148A(a) is hereby dispensed with as a one-time measure vis-à-vis those notices which have been issued under section 148 of the unamended Act from 01.04.2021 till date, including those which have been quashed by the High Courts. Even otherwise as observed hereinabove holding any enquiry with the prior approval of specified authority is not mandatory but it is for the concerned Assessing Officer to hold any enquiry, if required; (iii) The assessing officers shall thereafter pass orders in terms of section 148A(d) in respect of each of the concerned assessees; Thereafter after following the procedure as required under section 148A may issue notice under section 148 (as substituted); (iv) All defences which may be available to the assessees including those available under section 149 of the IT Act and all rights and contentions which may be available to the concerned assessees and Revenue under the Finance Act, 2021 and in law shall continue to be available. 11. The present order shall be applicable PAN INDIA and all judgments and orders passed by different High Courts on the issue and under which similar notices which were issued after 01.04.2021 issued under section 148 of the Act are set aside and shall be governed by the present order and shall stand modified to the aforesaid extent. The present order is passed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India so as to avoid any further appeals by the Revenue on the very issue by challenging similar judgments
(3 of 3) [CW-5888/2022] and orders, with a view not to burden this Court with approximately 9000 appeals. We also observe that present order shall also govern the pending writ petitions, pending before various High Courts in which similar notices under Section 148 of the Act issued after 01.04.2021 are under challenge. 12. The impugned common judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Allahabad and the similar judgments and orders passed by various High Courts, more particularly, the respective judgments and orders passed by the various High Courts particulars of which are mentioned hereinabove, shall stand modified/substituted to the aforesaid extent only. All these appeals are accordingly partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. In the facts of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.” Accordingly, this writ petition is also finally disposed of in terms of order dated 04.05.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Agarwal (supra), as stated above. The authorities concerned shall proceed to decide the matter in accordance with the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 10 of the aforesaid order. Consequent upon the disposal of the writ petition, the stay application filed therewith does not survive and the same also stands disposed of accordingly. (SAMEER JAIN),J (PRAKASH GUPTA),J KuD/MR/2
More judgments on Section 148
- Bha Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs ACIT, Central Circle- 29, New DelhiITA 5208/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed6 Nov 2026AY 2015-16
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Sri Sai Poornima Microns vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner(St)Andhra Pradesh · 2 Nov 2026
- Pollisetti Venkata Ramakrishna vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Ayyappa Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State TaxAndhra Pradesh · 2 Nov 2026
- Commissioner Of Customs(Airport And General), New Delhi vs. M/S Mauli Worldwide LogisticsDelhi · 2 Nov 2026
- Padu Paraja vs. The Comnr. Of CT. And GST, OdishaOrissa · 2 Nov 2026