Govind Ram Bagaria v. Income Tax Office, Ward
High Court
15 Mar 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Govind Ram Bagaria v. Income Tax Office, Ward
Date of order
15 Mar 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Govind Ram Bagaria v. Income Tax Office, Ward, the High Court (2022) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In view of the above statement made by learned counsel for thepetitioner, the impugned notice issued in the present case, for thereasons stated in the order dated 27.01.2022 passed in the aforesaidcases, is also quashed and set aside and the petition is allowed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4169/2022
Govind Ram Bagaria S/o Bajrang Lal Bagaria, Aged About 61 Years,R/o C/O Bajrang Lal Bagaria, Bhola Ram Bagla Marg, Near SubhashChowk Churu 331001, Rajasthan, India.
----Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Office, Ward-1, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, BehindCollectorate, Mandawa Road, Jhunjhunu, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan333001
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devang Gargieya, Advocate forMr. Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAINJudgment / Order
15/03/2022
Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset would submit thatthe issue involved in this petition is no longer res integra as it has beenput to an end by Division Bench of this Court in the decision renderedon 27.01.2022 in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) &Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 and batch of petitions) wherethe notices issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 havebeen found to be invalid and impermissible in law and quashed.
In view of the above statement made by learned counsel for thepetitioner, the impugned notice issued in the present case, for thereasons stated in the order dated 27.01.2022 passed in the aforesaidcases, is also quashed and set aside and the petition is allowed.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue