Case LawHigh Court › Wtax/658/2017 Of Ms/ Sunil Kumar Rastogi...

Wtax/658/2017 Of Ms/ Sunil Kumar Rastogi Huf v. Income Tax Officezr-3 4

High Court 02 Dec 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisdb_16012018
Parties
Wtax/658/2017 Of Ms/ Sunil Kumar Rastogi Huf v. Income Tax Officezr-3 4
Date of order
02 Dec 2019
Assessment year(s)
2010-2011
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Wtax/658/2017 Of Ms/ Sunil Kumar Rastogi Huf v. Income Tax Officezr-3 4, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.

Decision: The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 658 of 2017 Petitioner :- Ms/ Sunil Kumar Rastogi Huf Respondent :- Income Tax Officezr-3 4Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhinav MehrotraCounsel for Respondent :- Bharat Ji Agarwal,Shubham Agarwal Hon'ble Biswanath Somadder,J.Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. The writ petitioner has approached this Court challenging anotice dated 30th March, 2017, issued under section 148 ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961, read with the order dated 05thSeptember, 2017, issued by the Income Tax authorities inrespect of reassessment of income of the writ petitioner forthe assessment year 2010-2011. A plain reading of the notice dated 30th March, 2017,reveals that the same was issued after obtaining necessarysatisfaction of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kanpur, on the basis of approval dated 30th March,2017. The reasons for issuance of notice has also beenannexed to the writ petition wherefrom it appears that thecase was reopened for assessment under section 147 of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, in respect of assessment year 2010-2011 since the assessee had not filed return of income forthe assessment year 2010-2011. The records of the case,however, reveals that the assessee, in fact, had filed returnof income for the assessment year 2010-2011. As such non- filing of return by the assessee could not possibly havebeen the reason for re - opening of assessment undersection 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. If the assesse had not disclosed income or concealedincome, the reason for re - opening of assessment ought tohave reflected otherwise, in the notice dated 30th March,2017. In that view of the matter – on a very short and narrowcompass – we are of the view that the notice dated 30thMarch, 2017, issued under section 148 of the Income TaxAct read with order dated 05th September, 2017, issued byIncome Tax Officer-3 (4), Kanpur, cannot be sustained inlaw and is liable to be set aside and is accordingly, setaside. Setting aside of the notice dated 30th March, 2017, readwith the consequential order dated 05th September, 2017,however, shall not, in any manner, stand in the way of theIncome Tax authorities to proceed further in the matter inaccordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Order Date :- 2.12.2019/Vikram / Neeraj (Biswanath Somadder, J.) (Ajay Bhanot, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan