Santosh Bishnoi vs Central Board Of Direct Taxes ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 13314 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Santosh Bishnoi vs Central Board Of Direct Taxes ... on 16 September, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:41289-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17276/2025

Santosh Bishnoi W/o Het Ram Bishnoi, Aged About 66 Years,
Resident Of 28B, Road No. 6, Shiv Shakti Nagar, Mahamandir,
Jodhpur, Rajasthan - 342001.
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Through Chairman,
         Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, North Block,
         New Delhi.
2.       Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1,
         Jodhpur.
3.       Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Pali.
4.       Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 1, Jodhpur, (Pcit
         Jodhpur), Aayakar Bhawan, Poata C Road, Jodhpur.
5.       Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (National E-
         Assessment Center), 2Nd Floor, E-Ramp, Jawaharlal
         Nehru Stadium Delhi - 110003
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner               :     Mr. Sharad Kothari, Advocate
For Respondents              :     Mr. K.K. Bissa, Advocate



          HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA

Order

16/09/2025

1. One of the primary grounds raised is that notice under

Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been issued by

Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not Faceless Assessing

Officer (FAO).

2. Indisputably, the notice to petitioner has been issued by the

JAO and not FAO.

3. Shri Kothari counsel for petitioner is correct in submitting

that this issue has been extensively dealt with in Hexaware

Technologies Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-

(Uploaded on 17/09/2025 at 05:16:10 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:41289-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-17276/2025]

tax, Circle 15(1)(2)1, Sharda Devi Chhajer Vs. The Income

Tax Officer & Another2 and Shree Cement Limited Vs.

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax & Others3.

4. Shri Bissa submitted that in Hexaware Technologies Ltd.

(supra), Revenue has preferred a Special Leave Petition and notice

has been issued. Counsel states that in view of the law as it

stands today, Court may grant the prayer of petitioner but in case

the Apex Court interferes with judgment in Hexaware

Technologies Ltd. (supra), Sharda Devi Chhajer (supra) or

Shree Cement Limited (supra), then Revenue should be given

liberty to revive the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.

5. Therefore, keeping open all rights and contentions of parties,

we quash and set aside notice dated 07.04.2023 issued under

Section 148 of the Act, order dated 07.04.2023 passed under

Section 148A(d) and consequential assessment order dated

25.03.2025 passed under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and

144B of the Act, with liberty as prayed.

6. Petition disposed.

7. Consequently, all pending applications, if any, also stand

disposed.

                                       (RAVI CHIRANIA),J                                                  (K.R. SHRIRAM),CJ
                                       21-pooja/-




                                   1    [2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)
                                   2    2025 SCCOnLine Raj 3386
                                   3    DB Civil Writ Petition No.10540/2024, dated 05.08.2025 at Jaipur Bench (unreported)

(Uploaded on 17/09/2025 at 05:16:10 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)