Gajendra Prakash Solanki vs Income Tax Officer ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 13389 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 13389 Raj
Judgement Date : 17 September, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Gajendra Prakash Solanki vs Income Tax Officer ... on 17 September, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:41557-DB]

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                          JODHPUR
                      D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10774/2022

    Gajendra Prakash Solanki S/o Shri Mithan Lal, Aged About 42
    Years, R/o 5/ii, Shri Roopam, New Panchwati Colony, Ratanada,
    Jodhpur.
                                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                                Versus
    Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Makrana, District Nagaur.
                                                                                ----Respondent

For Petitioner                       :     Mr. Lokesh Mathur
For Respondent                       :     Mr. K.K. Bissa

     HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA

Order 17/09/2025

1. At the outset, Mr. Lokesh Mathur states that the legal ground

that the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is

not valid because it has been issued by Jurisdictional Assessing

Officer (JAO) and not Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), has not

been taken. Counsel states in the Court that petition is yet to be

admitted and if the Court insists, petitioner will take out an

application for adding grounds.

2. Mr. Bissa states that this Court has taken a view that such a

notice will be invalid and he will not insist on formal amendment in

the petition.

3. Ground referred to is that the notice dated 29 th June 2021

under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been issued

by a Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not Faceless

Assessing Officer (FAO) and this Court in the case of Shree

Cement Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-

Tax& Others1 following Sharda Devi Chhajer Vs. The Income

1 DB Civil Writ Petition No.10540/2024, dated 05.08.2025 at Jaipur Bench (unreported)

(Uploaded on 18/09/2025 at 10:30:19 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:41557-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-10774/2022]

Tax Officer & Another2 and Hexaware Technologies Ltd. Vs.

Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 15(1)(2) 3,

has held that such a notice will be bad and not valid.

4. At the same time, Mr. Bissa states 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. Mr. Lokesh Mathur states that in view of the above, for the

present, petitioner will reserve his right to raise other grounds at

an appropriate stage.

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

we quash and set aside notice dated 29 th June 2021 issued under

Section 148 of the Act with liberty as prayed.

7. Petition disposed.

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

disposed.

9. In case, if any re-assessment order is passed, the same will

also stand quashed and set aside.

                                       (RAVI CHIRANIA),J                                              (K.R. SHRIRAM),CJ

                                   22-pooja/-



                                   2    2025 SCC OnLine Raj 3386
                                   3    [2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)

(Uploaded on 18/09/2025 at 10:30:19 AM)