Case LawHigh Court › Kamal Sharma v. Income Tax Officer, Ward...

Kamal Sharma v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Ncr Building, Statuecircle, Jaipur.circle, Jaipur

High Court 19 May 2025 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Kamal Sharma v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Ncr Building, Statuecircle, Jaipur.circle, Jaipur
Date of order
19 May 2025
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Kamal Sharma v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Ncr Building, Statuecircle, Jaipur.circle, Jaipur, the High Court (2025) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: 4.The writ petition is allowed.

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. 628/2023 Kamal Sharma S/o Ram Prasad, Aged About 36 Years, ResidentOf 42, Lal Singh Judo Colony, Near Jaipuriya Hospital. TonkRoad, Jaipur - 302018 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Ncr Building, StatueCircle, Jaipur.Circle, Jaipur. 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashish SharmaFor Respondent(s): Mr. Sandeep Pathak HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT 19/05/2025 Order 1.This petition is filed seeking quashing of order dated21.07.2022 passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act,1961 for short (‘the Act’). 2.The brief facts are that for assessment year 2015-2016petitioner was issued notice dated 13.04.2021 u/s 148 of the Act.In compliance with the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Unionof India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Agarwal reported in (2022 INSC 510),the notice dated 26.05.2022 was issued u/s 148A(b) of the Actand therein it was specified that the reply be filed on or before13.06.2022. The petitioner filed response on 24.06.2022. Theimpugned order was passed on 21.07.2022 stating that thereply/objections were not filed within the specified time period. The view taken by the assessing officer is hyper technical. Thereply filed by the petitioner was available on record and almostone month after filing of the objections, the impugned order waspassed that too without considering the objections. The intent ofthe procedure provided by insertion of Section 148A of the Act hasbeen defeated on technical basis. 3.The impugned order dated 21.07.2022 is set aside and thematter is remitted to ITO Ward No.6(2), Jaipurto proceed inaccordance with law for deciding the objections. 4.The writ petition is allowed. 5.In order to avoid any further complication, let petitioner orthrough his representative appear in the office of ITO WardNo.6(2), Jaipur on 04.06.2025 at 11:00 AM.through his representative appear in the office of ITO WardNo.6(2), Jaipur on 04.06.2025 at 11:00 AM. 6.Pending application(s) stands disposed of. (MUKESH RAJPUROHIT), J (AVNEESH JHINGAN), J GAURAV /91
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan