Quashed

Arvind Shah v. Dgit (Inv.) Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Sept 2025CW/14272/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur, in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14272/2024, allowed an application to raise legal grounds. Irregularities and prior judgments indicated that a notice dated 21st March 2024 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of a Faceless Assessing Officer, was invalid.

What did the court decide?

Notice dated 21st March 2024 under Section 148 of the Act with liberty to Revenue to revive the notice if Apex Court interferes with cited judgments is quashed and set aside.

Arvind Shah Vs Dgit (Inv.) Rajasthan — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:34967-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14272/2024

¶4

Arvind Shah, 2654, Shah Bhawan, Ghee Walo Ka Rasta Johari Bazar, Jaipur- 302003.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

	Versus
1.	Dgit (Inv.) Rajasthan, Income-Tax Department, Ncr Building, Statue Circle,Jaipur.
2.	Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Income Tax
	Department,Ncr Building,Statue Circle,Jaipur.
3.	Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4,
	Income Tax Department,Ncr Building,Statue Circle,Jaipur.

¶7

----Respondents

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. P.K. Kasliwal with Mr. Priyesh Ksaliwal
For Respondents	: Mr. Siddharth Bapna with
	Mr. Sarvesh Jain, Mr. Meyhul Mittal &
	Mr. Rahul Kumar

¶9

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order

¶10

01/09/2025

¶11

Application (No.1/2025) for raising legal grounds is allowed.

¶12

Mr. Bapna, who appears on advance copy, agrees with Mr. Kasliwal that one of the grounds raised certainly is covered by a judgment of this Court.

¶13

Ground referred to is that the notice dated 21^st March 2024 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been issued by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not Faceless Assessing Offider (FAO) and this Court in the case of Shree Cement Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

¶14

& Others¹ following Sharda Devi Chhajer Vs. The Income Tax Officer & Another² and Hexaware Technologies Ltd. Vs.

¶15

1 DB Civil Writ Petition No.10540/2024, dated 05.08.2025 at Jaipur Bench (unreported)

¶16

2 2025 SCCOnLine Raj 3386

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[2025:RJ-JP:34967-DB]

¶19

[CW-14272/2024]

¶20

Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 15(1)(2)³ , has held that such a notice will be bad and not valid.

¶21

At the same time, Mr. Bapna states that in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. ( supra ), Revenue has preferred a Special Leave Petition and notice has been issued. Counsel states that in view of the law as it stands today, Court may grant the prayer of petitioner but in case the Apex Court interferes with judgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. ( supra ), Sharda Devi Chhajer ( supra ) or Shree Cement Limited ( supra ), then Revenue should be given liberty to revive the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.

¶22

Mr. Kasliwal states that in view of the above, for the present, petitioner will reserve his right to raise other grounds at an appropriate stage.

¶23

Therefore, keeping open all rights and contentions of parties, we quash and set aside notice dated 21^st March 2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act with liberty as prayed.

¶24