Praveen Kumar Goel (Huf) v. Income Tax Officer, Ward
High Court
28 Mar 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Praveen Kumar Goel (Huf) v. Income Tax Officer, Ward
Date of order
28 Mar 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Praveen Kumar Goel (Huf) v. Income Tax Officer, 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 forthe petitioner, 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. 4160/2022
Praveen Kumar Goel (HUF), Having its office at 2/206, VidhyadharNagar, Jaipur-302023, Rajasthan, India through its Karta Sh. PraveenKumar Goel.
----Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Sikar, Todi Nagar, Sanwali Road, Sikar-332001, Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Petitioner : Mr. Javed Khan Advocate. For Respondents: Mr. N.S. Bhati Advocate on behalf of Mr. Anuroop Singhi Advocate.
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAINOrder
28/03/2022
Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset wouldsubmit that the issue involved in this petition is no longer res integraas it has been put to an end by Division Bench of this Court in thedecision rendered on 27.01.2022 in Sudesh Taneja Vs. Income TaxOfficer, Ward-1(3) & Anr. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 969/2022 andbatch of petitions) where the notices issued under Section 148 of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 have been found to be invalid and impermissiblein law and quashed.
In view of the above statement made by learned counsel forthe petitioner, 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
MANOJ NARWANI /133
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