Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rk Rajendra Singh vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:37679-Db) on 22 August, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:37679-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8888/2023
RK Rajendra Singh S/o Late Shri Himmat Singh Ji Saheb, Aged
About 69 Years, By Caste Rajput, R/o Maharaja Himmat Singh
Bungalow, Near University, Jodhpur 342001.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Department Of
Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, New Delhi 110001.
2. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-I, Jodhpur,
Aaykar Bhawan, Paota 'c' Road, Jodhpur 342001.
3. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-I, Jodhpur,
Aaykar Bhawan, Paota 'c' Road, Jodhpur 342001.
4. The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment
Centre, Income Tax Department, New Delhi 110001.
----Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Lokesh Mathur
For Respondents : Mr. K.K. Bissa
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA
Order
22/08/2025
1. Petition impugns a re-assessment order dated 31st May 2023
passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act').
2. Various grounds have been raised, primary ground being that
order has been issued without jurisdiction and by completely
misconstruing the directions given by Apex Court in the case of
Union of India (UOI) and Ors. vs. Ashish Agarwal 1. It is
1 (2023) 1 SCC 617
[2025:RJ-JD:37679-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-8888/2023]
petitioner's case and we agree with petitioner that judgment in
Ashish Agarwal (supra) is inapplicable to petitioner's case.
3. For Assessment Year 2013-2014, petitioner had filed a return
of income on 5th August 2013 declaring total income of
Rs.7,57,49,430/-. An assessment order came to be passed on
22nd March 2021 under Section 143(3) of the Act, against which
an appeal has been preferred by assessee and the same is
pending.
4. During pendency of this appeal, petitioner is stated to have
received a notice dated 31st March 2021 issued under Section 148
of the Act. After notice was issued, petitioner was issued another
notice dated 2nd June, 2022 stating that as per directions of
Hon'ble Apex Court in Ashish Agarwal (supra), notice dated 31st
March, 2021 issued under Section 148 is deemed to be show
cause notice under sub-clause (b) of Section 148A of the Act. The
department, thereafter, has followed due process and has issued
impugned assessment order dated 31st May 2023.
5. It is petitioner's case that Ashish Agarwal (supra) is
inapplicable because the amendment to Sub-section 148 and
insertion of Section 148A happened by the Finance Act, 2021 with
effect from 1st April 2021 and therefore, pre-amendment
provisions will be applicable as notice under Section 148 of the Act
was issued to petitioner on 31st March 2021.
6. In the affidavit in reply, stand taken by department is that
notice was issued on ITBA portal on 1 st April 2021 and, therefore,
directions issued in Ashish Agarwal (supra) will be applicable.
[2025:RJ-JD:37679-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-8888/2023]
7. We are not inclined to accept this specious submission of
counsel for respondents because notice under Section 148 of the
Act is digitally signed on 31 st March 2021 at 06:04 p.m. and in
reply to application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 by
petitioner, it is stated that notice was issued on 31 st March, 2022
(should be 2021) at 06:04 p.m. In fact even in assessment order,
it is stated that notice under Section 148 dated 31 st March 2021
was issued to assessee with prior approval of the competent
authority. Approval of competent authority is annexed to petition
and it is dated 22nd March 2021.
8. Therefore, directions of Hon'ble Apex Court in Ashish
Agarwal (supra) will not be applicable to petitioner's case and
since re-assessment order dated 31st May 2023 is passed following
judgment in Ashish Agarwal (supra) by applying amended
provisions, assessment order, in our view, cannot be sustained.
The same is hereby quashed and set aside.
9. Petition disposed.
10. We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on merits
of appeal, which is pending before the department.
(SANDEEP TANEJA),J (K.R. SHRIRAM),CJ
4-MohitTak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
