Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rajinder Singh Kahlon vs Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income ... on 16 April, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:18672-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2390/2025
Rajinder Singh Kahlon son of Hari Singh Kahlon, aged about 70
Years, residing at 402, Phase 4 Mohali Punjab
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur
Central Revenue Building, B.D. Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan
2. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1) Central Revenue Building
Rani Bazar Bikaner Rajasthan
3. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Central Revenue Building,
Rani Bazar, Bikaner, Rajasthan
4. Chief Commissioner, of Income Tax Jodhpur Aajkar
Bhawan Paota C Road Jodhpur Rajasthan
5. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Jodhpur, Aaykar
Bhawan, Paota C Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pushkar Taimni, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa, Advocate
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
16/04/2025
This writ petition seeks to challenge order dated 10th April
2024 passed under section 148(A)(d) of the Income Tax Act,
1961.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has pressed only the
prayer made at clause A.
3. Mr. Pushkar Taimni, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Mr. K.K. Bissa, the learned counsel appearing for
the Revenue inform the Court that batch of writ petitions vide D.B.
[2025:RJ-JD:18672-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-2390/2025]
Writ Petition No.11787/2024 and analogous cases titled "Sharda
Devi Chhajer v. The Income Tax Officer and Anr." have been
decided by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment
rendered on 19th March 2025. In the aforesaid Judgment, a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court held as under :-
"20. Thus, this Court holds that the mandate of Section
151A of the Act of 1961 has to be strictly followed as there cannot
be a way out of doing the same. This Court also holds that the JAO
shall not have the jurisdiction to issue notices under Section 148 of
the Act of 1961, as it would not only render Section 151A weak, but
may also lead to its diminishing activation. For the purpose of
assessment and reassessment under Sections 147, 148 & 148A and
in light of the sanction under Section 151A, adherence has to be
made to algorithm based random assessing system, and therefore,
the impugned notices deserve to be quashed.
21. Consequently, the present writ petitions are allowed.
Accordingly, the impugned Notices are quashed and set aside, as far
as the jurisdiction of JAOs for the purpose of Sections 148 & 148A of
the Act of 1961 to issue the same is concerned. The question raised
herein stands answered in the terms indicated above, with liberty to
the respondents to issue fresh notices in compliance of the CBDT
Notification dated 29.03.2022, by keeping the FAO as assessing
officer.
21.1 However, the time spent during the pendency of the present
litigation in the Court, shall be excluded for the purpose of
computing limitation for issuance of fresh notices, in case, need
arised.
21.2 All pending applications stand disposed of"
4. Following the decision in "Sharda Devi Chhajer", this Court
dealt with another batch of writ petitions vide D.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.3270 of 2023 and analogous cases titled "M/s. S.M.
Industries v. Union of India and Anr." and disposed of those writ
petitions in the light of the decision rendered in "Sharda Devi
Chhajer". Following the aforementioned decisions in "Sharda Devi
Chhajer and M/s. S.M. Industries", the present writ petition is
[2025:RJ-JD:18672-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-2390/2025]
allowed by setting aside the assessment order dated 10 th April
2024 passed under section 148(A)(d) of the Income Tax Act,
1961, with liberty to the Revenue to proceed further in the matter,
if so decided, to issue fresh notices in compliance of the C.B.D.T.
Notification dated 29th March 2022 by keeping F.A.O. as the
Assessing Officer.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J (SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR),J
31-Arjun/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
