Inder Colonizers Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Jaipur, Ncr Building, Statuecircle, Jaipur
High Court
04 Mar 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Inder Colonizers Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Jaipur, Ncr Building, Statuecircle, Jaipur
Date of order
04 Mar 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Inder Colonizers Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Jaipur, Ncr Building, Statuecircle, Jaipur, the High Court (2022) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3525/2022
Inder Colonizers Private Limited, having its Registered Office AtC-81 B, Chetanya Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur- 302001, Through itsDirector Ajay Sharda
----Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2), Jaipur, NCR Building, StatueCircle, Jaipur
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya VijayFor Respondent(s): Mr. R.B. Mathur, Sr. Adv. withMr. Amit Malani
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
04/03/2022
Judgment / Order
Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counselfor the revenue at the outset would submit that the issue involvedin this petition is no longer res integra as it has been put to anend by the 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 ofpetitions) where the notices issued under Section 148 of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 have been found to be invalid andimpermissible in law and quashed.
In view of the above statement made by learned counsel forboth the parties, the impugned notice issued in the present case,for the reasons stated in the order dated 27.01.2022 passed in the
aforesaid cases, is also quashed and set aside and the petition isallowed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J
Ritu/8
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.