Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Tiloka Ram vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 1 ... on 19 September, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:41962-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18450/2024
Tiloka Ram S/o Shri Hemaram, Aged About 48 Years, Godawari
Construction Company, Jhalra Road, Tehsil Kuchaman City,
Kuchaman City, District Deedwana- Kuchaman, Rajasthan-
341508.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 1, Jodhpur,
Aayakar Bhawan, Lal Maidan, Paota C Road, Jodhpur.
2. Income Tax Officer, Ito Ward 1, Makrana, Rajasthan, Near
Byepass Railway Overbridge, Shive Colony, Makrana,
District Nagaur, Rajasthan-341505.
----Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Pushkar Taimini
For Respondents : Mr. K.K Bissa
Mr. GS Chouhan
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.R. SHRIRAM
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA
Order
19/09/2025
1. At the outset, Mr. Pushkar Taimini 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. K.K 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 20th March 2024
under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been issued
(Uploaded on 20/09/2025 at 02:12:15 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41962-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-18450/2024]
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 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. K.K 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. Pushkar Taimini 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 20 th March 2024 issued under
Section 148 of the Act with liberty as prayed.
7. Petition disposed.
8. Consequently, all pending applications, if any, also stand
disposed.
1 DB Civil Writ Petition No.10540/2024, dated 05.08.2025 at Jaipur Bench (unreported)
2 2025 SCC OnLine Raj 3386
3 [2024] 162 taxmann.com 225 (Bombay)
(Uploaded on 20/09/2025 at 02:12:15 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41962-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-18450/2024]
9. In case, if any re-assessment order is passed, the same will
also stand quashed and set aside.
(SANGEETA SHARMA),J (K.R. SHRIRAM),CJ
25-divyaP/-
(Uploaded on 20/09/2025 at 02:12:15 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
