Rkd Infraprojects Private Limited v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(2), Jaipur, New Bhagwan Das Road,Jaipur Rajasthan

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6855/2024 Rkd Infraprojects Private Limited, Having Its Office At 160, GomDefence Colony, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur- 302021 Through ItsAuthorized Signatory Priya Dusad D/o Kailash Chand PabuwalAged About 47. ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(2), Jaipur, New Bhagwan Das Road,Jaipur Rajasthan- 302005 ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Aditya Vijay Advocate. : Mr. Sandeep Pathak Advocate with Mr. Palash Gupta Advocate. HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA 09/09/2025 Order 1.Mr. Sandeep Pathak, who appears on advance copy, agreeswith Mr. Aditya Vijay that one of the grounds raised certainly iscovered by a judgment of this Court. 2.Ground referred to is that the notice dated 31[th] March 2024under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been issuedby a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not FacelessAssessing Officer (FAO) and this Court in the case of ShreeCement Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax& Others[1] following Sharda Devi Chhajer Vs. The Income TaxOfficer & Another[2]and Hexaware Technologies Ltd. Vs. 1DB Civil Writ Petition No.10540/2024, dated 05.08.2025 at Jaipur Bench (unreported)22025 SCCOnLine Raj 338622025 SCCOnLine Raj 3386 Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 15(1)(2)[3],has held that such a notice will be bad and not valid. 3.At the same time, Mr. Sandeep Pathak states that inHexaware Technologies Ltd. (supra), Revenue has preferred aSpecial Leave Petition and notice has been issued. Counsel statesthat in view of the law as it stands today, Court may grant theprayer of petitioner but in case the Apex Court interferes withjudgment in Hexaware Technologies Ltd. (supra), ShardaDevi Chhajer (supra) or Shree Cement Limited (supra), thenRevenue should be given liberty to revive the notice issued underSection 148 of the Act. 4.Mr. Aditya Vijay states that in view of the above, for thepresent, petitioner will reserve its right to raise other grounds atan appropriate stage. 5.Therefore, keeping open all rights and contentions of parties,we quash and set aside notice dated 31[th] March 2024 issued underSection 148 of the Act with liberty as prayed. 6.Petition disposed. 7.Consequently, all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed. 8.In case, if any re-assessment order is passed, the same willalso stand quashed and set aside. (MANEESH SHARMA),J (K.R. SHRIRAM),CJ SANJAY KUMAWAT/54