Radha Mohan Vijay (A.y. 2013-14) v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle
High Court
04 Apr 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Radha Mohan Vijay (A.y. 2013-14) v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle
Date of order
04 Apr 2022
Assessment year(s)
2013-14
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Radha Mohan Vijay (A.y. 2013-14) v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, the High Court (2022) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: In view of the above statement made by learnedcounsel for the petitioner, the impugned notice issued in thepresent case, for the reasons stated in the order dated27.01.2022 passed in the aforesaid cases, is also quashed and setaside 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
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5112/2022
Radha Mohan Vijay (A.Y. 2013-14) S/o Shri Jagannath PrasadVijay, Aged About 54 Years, R/o B-268, Janta Colony, Jaipur,Rajasthan - 302004.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4, NewCentral Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur,Rajasthan - 302005.Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur,Rajasthan - 302005.
2. Union of India, though its Secretary, Central Board ofDirect Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance,North Block, New Delhi (NCT)-110001.Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance,North Block, New Delhi (NCT)-110001.
----Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Vedant Agrawal Advocate.
For Respondent: Mr. Nikhil Simlote Advocate.
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
04/04/2022
Mr. Nikhil Simlote, learned counsel enters appearanceon behalf of the respondents.
Advance copy of the petition has been supplied tolearned counsel for the respondents.
At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner wouldsubmit that till date, final assessment order has not been passed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit thatthe issue involved in this petition is no longer res integra as it hasbeen put to an end by Division Bench of this Court in the decisionrendered on 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) 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 learnedcounsel for the petitioner, the impugned notice issued in thepresent case, for the reasons stated in the order dated27.01.2022 passed in the aforesaid cases, is also quashed and setaside and the petition is allowed.
(SAMEER JAIN),J(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ
MANOJ NARWANI /18
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