Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Smt. Pushpa Devi Vs. Ito

Smt. Pushpa Devi vs ito

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Mar 19, 2004
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/769134

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case Number
Civil Writ Petition No. 1645 of 2004 S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No. 1435 of 2004 19 March 200
Subject
Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Counsels: Sanjay Jhanwar, for the Assessee In the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench S.K. Keshote, J. S.B. - - 3. Otherwise also I am satisfied that this matter is squarely covered by the Division Bench decision dated 9-1-2004 of this court in D.

Key legal issue
Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Smt. Pushpa Devi

Advocate Sanjay Jhanwar, <i>for the Assessee</i>

Respondent

ito

Legal References

Reported In
[2004]141TAXMAN437(Raj)

Excerpt

counsels: sanjay jhanwar, for the assessee in the rajasthan high court, jaipur bench s.k. keshote, j. s.b. - - 3. otherwise also i am satisfied that this matter is squarely covered by the division bench decision dated 9-1-2004 of this court in d.orderhaving heard learned counsel for the petitioner it is difficult to appreciate this litigation in the court by the assessee of the income-tax at this stage. only show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner and there is ample opportunity to her to put all the points for consideration before the assessing authority. even there may not be any difficulty for the petitioner to submit before the assessing authority that he has no jurisdiction to issue this notice under section 148 of the income tax act, 1961. against the final order passed in the proceedings it is not the case that the petitioner may not have any remedy. the order of reassessment made by the assessing authority is subject to the first appeal, second appeal and even now the third appeal to this court.2. it is not necessary as what it is prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a direction be issued to the assessing authority to decide all the points raised in the reply to the notice. it is his duty to consider and give his decision on the points raised in the reply to the show-cause notice by the petitioner.3. otherwise also i am satisfied that this matter is squarely covered by the division bench decision dated 9-1-2004 of this court in d.b. special appeal (writ) no. 138/2003 decided along with nine other cognate matters.4. in the result this writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. consequent upon the dismissal of the writ petition, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and the same is also dismissed.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner it is difficult to appreciate this litigation in the court by the assessee of the Income-tax at this stage. Only show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner and there is ample opportunity to her to put all the points for consideration before the assessing authority. Even there may not be any difficulty for the petitioner to submit before the assessing authority that he has no jurisdiction to issue this notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Against the final order passed in the proceedings it is not the case that the petitioner may not have any remedy. The order of reassessment made by the assessing authority is subject to the first appeal, second appeal and even now the third appeal to this Court.

2. It is not necessary as what it is prayed for by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a direction be issued to the assessing authority to decide all the points raised in the reply to the notice. It is his duty to consider and give his decision on the points raised in the reply to the show-cause notice by the petitioner.

3. Otherwise also I am satisfied that this matter is squarely covered by the Division Bench decision dated 9-1-2004 of this court in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 138/2003 decided along with nine other cognate matters.

4. In the result this writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. Consequent upon the dismissal of the writ petition, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and the same is also dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial