Ramesh Chand Maheshwari v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipurhaving Its Office At Room

[2025:RJ-JP:7020-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2449/2025 Ramesh Chand Maheshwari S/o Shri Laxmi Narain Maheshwari,Aged About 64 Years, Resident Of 3, Shubham Enclave, JamnaLal Bajaj Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur 302001. ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, JaipurHaving Its Office At Room No. 416, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, LicBuilding, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner For Respondent : Mr. Siddharth Ranka withMr. Rohan ChatterMs. Apeksha BapnaMr. Rohan ChatterMs. Apeksha Bapna: Mr. Siddharth Bapna withMr. Sarvesh Jain,Mr. Meyhul Mittal &Mr. Rahul KumarMr. Sarvesh Jain,Mr. Meyhul Mittal &Mr. Rahul Kumar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAROrder 18/02/2025 -AVNEESH JHINGAN, J. : 1.This petition is filed seeking quashing of notice dated20.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short ‘the Act’) relating to assessment year 2015-16.2.The brief facts are that proceedings for the relevantassessment year were initiated under Section 153A of the Actagainst the petitioner culminated in an order of the Income TaxSettlement Commission dated 09.10.2018. A notice under Section148 of the Act was issued on 20.03.2024 and the reasons forreopening were supplied. The petitioner filed objections dated 16.11.2024 and 28.11.2024. Without deciding the objection, thenotice dated 23.01.2025 was issued, hence the present petition.3.Interalia the grievance raised in the petition is that thedepartment is not complying with the decision of the SupremeCourt in the case of Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer And Ors. reported in (2003) 259 ITR Page 19. 4.Leaned counsel for the respondent appears on advancenotice is not in a position to dispute the legal position. 5.Before proceedings further, it would be relevant to quote theoperative part of the judgment passed in the case of Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra). “5. We see no justifiable reason to interferewith the order under challenge. However,we clarify that when a notice under Section148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, theproper course of action for the notice is tofile return and if he so desires, to seekreasons for issuing notices. The assessingofficer is bound to furnish reasons within areasonable time. On receipt of reasons, thenotice is entitled to file objections toissuance of notice and the assessing officeris bound to dispose of the same by passinga speaking order. In the instant case, asthe reasons have been disclosed in theseproceedings, the assessing officer has todispose of the objections, is filed, bypassing a speaking order, beforeproceeding with the assessment in respectof the abovesaid five assessment years.6. Insofar as the appeals filed against theorder of assessment before theCommissioner (Appeals), we direct theappellate authority to dispose of the same,expeditiously. 7. With the above observations, the civilappeals are dismissed.” 6.The Assessing Officer is obligated to deal with the objectionsraised by the petitioner in accordance with law. As per thepleadings in the writ petition, the Assessing Officer is proceedingunder Section 148 of the Act, ignoring the objections dated16.11.2024 and 28.11.2024 filed by the petitioner. 7.The petition is disposed of with direction that the AssessingOfficer before proceeding further, shall proceed in accordance withthe decision of the Supreme Court in the case of GknDriveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra). 8.It is clarified that in case the objections have already beendecided, the order shall be communicated to the petitioner withinone week from the date of receipt of the certified copy of thisorder. 9.Needless to say that petitioner shall be at liberty to availremedies in accordance with law if aggrieved of the decision. 7.The petition is disposed of with direction that the AssessingOfficer before proceeding further, shall proceed in accordance withthe decision of the Supreme Court in the case of GknDriveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra). 8.It is clarified that in case the objections have already beendecided, the order shall be communicated to the petitioner withinone week from the date of receipt of the certified copy of thisorder. 9.Needless to say that petitioner shall be at liberty to availremedies in accordance with law if aggrieved of the decision. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J(AVNEESH JHINGAN),J RIYA/Aarzoo Arora/ 03 Whether Reportable : Yes