Samant Bhadra Real Estates v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur
High Court
04 Apr 2022 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Samant Bhadra Real Estates v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur
Date of order
04 Apr 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Samant Bhadra Real Estates v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur, the High Court (2022) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
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
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5134/2022
Samant Bhadra Real Estates, Having Its Address At F-62, FirstFloor, Sunder Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur 302001 In The State OfRajasthan Through Its Partner Smt. Kusum Gangwal.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur Having Its AddressAt New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road,Jaipur 302005At New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road,Jaipur 302005
2. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Ministry Of Finance, HavingIts Address At North Block, New Delhi-110011 ThroughIts Chairman.Its Address At North Block, New Delhi-110011 ThroughIts Chairman.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Muzaffar Iqbal, Advocate for
Mr. Siddharth Ranka, Advocate
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
04/04/2022
At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner wouldsubmit that so far no final order of assessment has been passedby the Assessing Authority.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
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 batchof petitions) where the notices issued under Section 148 of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 have been found to be invalid andimpermissible in law and quashed.
In view of the above statement made by learned counsel forthe petitioner, the impugned notice issued in the present case, forthe reasons stated in the order dated 27.01.2022 passed in theaforesaid cases, is also quashed and set aside and the petition isallowed.
(SAMEER JAIN),J(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ
Karan/5
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.