Vaibhav Global Limited, E-69, Epip Sitapura Industrial Area,Jaipur v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipurhaving Its Address At 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, Lic Building,Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12529/2025 Vaibhav Global Limited, E-69, Epip Sitapura Industrial Area,Jaipur Through Its Authorized Representative Mr. Prateek Jain. ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, JaipurHaving Its Address At 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, Lic Building,Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranka, Adv.Mr. Rohan Chatter, Adv.Ms. Satvika Jha, Adv.Mr. Rohan Chatter, Adv.Ms. Satvika Jha, Adv.For Respondent(s): Mr. Siddharth Bapna, Adv.Mr. Rahul Kumar, Adv.Mr. Rahul Kumar, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT 22/08/2025 Order 1.This matter is related to Dinesh Kumar Khatoria Vs. TheAssistant Commissioner Of Income Tax in compliance ofwhich this Court has passed the following order:- “1.The challenge in this petition is to thenotice issued to the petitioner under Section153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (forshort, "IT Act) dated 04.02.2025 with regardto Assessment Year 2011-2012. 2.Learned counsel for the petitionersubmits that in the notice impugned, neitheramount has been mentioned nor in thesearch conducted name of the petitioner hasbeen mentioned, however, from the perusalof the satisfaction note for initiatingproceedings under Section 153C withreference to the petitioner for the year2011-2012, as conveyed to the petitioner, itis apparent that Dinesh Kumar Khatoria's documents were received in pen drive.Entries pertaining to Dinesh Kumar Khatoria,who paid cash loans to various persons,were found during the search proceedingsrelating to Ramesh Chand Maheshwari underSection 131 of the IT Act. We also noticedthat the petitioner had earlier preferred thewrit petition Nos.4490/2022 and 4635/2022before this Court challenging the noticeissued to him under Section 148 of the ITAct and this Court quashed the proceedingsunder Section 148 of the IT Act vide orderdated 19.03.2024, with liberty to theAuthorities to proceed against the writpetitioner in accordance with law. Since, thisCourt had granted permission to therespondent-Tax Authorities to proceed, thechallenge on the ground of limitation wouldalso not arise as the order was passed bythis Court granting liberty to the authoritiesto proceed. 3.In view thereto, the notice issued tothe petitioner with regard to undisclosedcashloansofanamountofRs.3,55,00,000/-,whichremainsundisclosed, has to be answered by thepetitioner to the Authorities. We, therefore,do not find any reasons to interfere with thenotice issued to the petitioner under Section153C. The petitioner is free to take up all thenecessary arguments and defense availableto him before the Authorities, who would berequired to pass an appropriate speakingorder. 4.With the said observations, the writpetition is dismissed accordingly. 5.Pending application(s), if any, alsostands disposed of.” 2.The notice of the petitioner is the consequence of the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in ShyamSunder Khandelwal & Ors. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.: reported in 2024 (4) TMI 196 (D.B. CivilWrit Petition No. 18363/2019) decided on 19.03.2024, whereDivision Bench held as under:- “40. In view of above discussion the noticesissued under Section 148 and the impugnedorders are quashed. However, the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed against thepetitioners in accordance with law.” 4.With the said observations, the writpetition is dismissed accordingly. 5.Pending application(s), if any, alsostands disposed of.” 2.The notice of the petitioner is the consequence of the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in ShyamSunder Khandelwal & Ors. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.: reported in 2024 (4) TMI 196 (D.B. CivilWrit Petition No. 18363/2019) decided on 19.03.2024, whereDivision Bench held as under:- “40. In view of above discussion the noticesissued under Section 148 and the impugnedorders are quashed. However, the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed against thepetitioners in accordance with law.” 3.It is noticed that the said judgment was assailed before theHon’ble Supreme Court and in the meanwhile taking cue from theobservations made by Division Bench, the Revenue has initiatedproceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1961) against the petitioner.Since we find that so far as in the earlier writ petitionsobservations were accepted by the assessee, the notice issued tothe petitioner for undisclosed income, as revealed whileconducting search of another person, and there being asatisfaction note which has been made a basis for initiatingproceedings under Section 153C of the Act of 1961, we are notinclined in any manner to interfere with the action, as taken bythe Revenue. 4.With the aforesaid observations, the present civil writpetition is dismissed. However, all the grounds are open for thepetitioner to be taken up before the authorities. 5.All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J HEENA/MAHIMA/13