RAMESH CHAND MAHESHWARI S/O SHRI LAXMI NARAIN MAHESHWARI V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/2449/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ramesh Chand Maheshwari, the petitioner, who challenged a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner had previously undergone proceedings under Section 153A of the Act, which concluded with an order from the Income Tax Settlement Commission. The notice for reopening the assessment was issued on 20.03.2024, and despite filing objections, the Assessing Officer proceeded without addressing these objections. The petitioner argued that this action was in violation of the Supreme Court's ruling in Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, which requires a proper response to objections before proceeding with the assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 746867 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer And Ors.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SIDDHARTH BAPNA; SARVESH JAIN; MEYHUL MITTAL; RAHUL KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDDHARTH RANKA; ROHAN CHATTER; APEKSHA BAPNA
• Keywords: Income tax settlement commission; Quashing of notice; Reopening of assessment; Objections to notice
• Section: 148; 153A

Judgement Text

"[2025:RJ-JP:7020-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2449/2025 Ramesh Chand Maheshwari S/o Shri Laxmi Narain Maheshwari, Aged About 64 Years, Resident Of 3, Shubham Enclave, Jamna Lal Bajaj Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur 302001. ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur Having Its Office At Room No. 416, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Siddharth Ranka with Mr. Rohan Chatter Ms. Apeksha Bapna For Respondent : Mr. Siddharth Bapna with Mr. Sarvesh Jain, Mr. Meyhul Mittal & Mr. Rahul Kumar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 18/02/2025 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.[ORAL]:- 1. This petition is filed seeking quashing of notice dated 20.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) relating to assessment year 2015-16. 2. The brief facts are that proceedings for the relevant assessment year were initiated under Section 153A of the Act against the petitioner culminated in an order of the Income Tax Settlement Commission dated 09.10.2018. A notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 20.03.2024 and the reasons for reopening were supplied. The petitioner filed objections dated [2025:RJ-JP:7020-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-2449/2025] 16.11.2024 and 28.11.2024. Without deciding the objection, the notice dated 23.01.2025 was issued, hence the present petition. 3. Interalia the grievance raised in the petition is that the department is not complying with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer And Ors. reported in (2003) 259 ITR Page 19. 4. Leaned counsel for the respondent appears on advance notice is not in a position to dispute the legal position. 5. Before proceedings further, it would be relevant to quote the operative part of the judgment passed in the case of Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra). “5. We see no justifiable reason to interfere with the order under challenge. However, we clarify that when a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the notice is to file return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. The assessing officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the notice is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the assessing officer is bound to dispose of the same by passing a speaking order. In the instant case, as the reasons have been disclosed in these proceedings, the assessing officer has to dispose of the objections, is filed, by passing a speaking order, before proceeding with the assessment in respect of the abovesaid five assessment years. 6. Insofar as the appeals filed against the order of assessment before the Commissioner (Appeals), we direct the appellate authority to dispose of the same, expeditiously. 7. With the above observations, the civil appeals are dismissed.” [2025:RJ-JP:7020-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-2449/2025] 6. The Assessing Officer is obligated to deal with the objections raised by the petitioner in accordance with law. As per the pleadings in the writ petition, the Assessing Officer is proceeding under Section 148 of the Act, ignoring the objections dated 16.11.2024 and 28.11.2024 filed by the petitioner. 7. The petition is disposed of with direction that the Assessing Officer before proceeding further, shall proceed in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (supra). 8. It is clarified that in case the objections have already been decided, the order shall be communicated to the petitioner within one week from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 9. Needless to say that petitioner shall be at liberty to avail remedies in accordance with law if aggrieved of the decision. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J RIYA/Aarzoo Arora/ 03 Whether Reportable : Yes "