D.b. Civil Writ Petition v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 4 Jaipur,Income Tax, New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road,Jaipur, Rajasthan

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12823/2025 Mahendra Verma S/o Late Kanhaiyalal Verma, Aged About 73Years, R/o A-207-208, Nagar Residency, Near Rungta Hospital,Malviya Nagar, Jaipur 302017, Through Power Of Attorney HolderVinod Bamalwa, Son Of Late Madan Lal Bamalwa, Aged About 51Years, Residing At 9/1 Lower Rawdon Street, L.R. Sarani S.O.Kolkata West Bengal 700020. ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 4 Jaipur,Income Tax, New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road,Jaipur, Rajasthan 302005. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Prakul Khurana andMr. Rajat Sharma For Respondent(s): Mr. Siddharth Bapna withMr. Meyhul Mittal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT 16/09/2025 Order 1.The challenge is to the notice issued under Section 153(C) ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 16.01.2025 for the Assessment Year 2015-2016 and the disposal of the objections against reassessment proceedings order dated 14.07.2025. 2.Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner hasvehemently argued that the notice was not maintainable againstthe petitioner under Section 153(C) and twin satisfaction of theAO were not recorded. He has also raised other ancillaryarguments. We notice that the petitioner had earlier preferred a writ petition No.2388/2022, wherein he challenged theproceedings initiated under Section 148 against the argumentadvanced that the proceedings should have been initiated underSection 153(C). Accordingly, this Court quashed the proceedingsinitiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act vide judgmentdated 19.03.2024 with liberty to the authorities to proceed againstthe writ petitioner in accordance with law. Since, the Courtgranted permission to the respondent- Tax Authorities to proceed,the challenge on the ground of limitation would not arise, now asit was at the instance of the petitioner that the order was passedby this Court granting liberty to the authorities to proceed. 3.In view thereto, the proceedings initiated against thepetitioner under Section 153(C) cannot be objected, the objectionshave been rightly rejected by the authorities. 4.We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with thenotice issued under Section 153(C), however, the petitioner is freeto take up all the necessary arguments and defence available tohim before the authorities who would of course pass anappropriate speaking order. 5.With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition isdismissed. Pending appreciation(s), if any, also stands disposed of.(SANJEET PUROHIT),J(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),JGAURAV/AVINASH/187