SUMTHIMAL LODHA SON OF LATE SHRI JATANMAL LODHA v. UNION OF INDIA
CW/15971/2023 · 2025-03-24
Avneesh Jhingan, Maneesh Sharma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 29840 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 29840 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:13105-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15971/2023 Sumthimal Lodha Son Of Late Shri Jatanmal Lodha, Aged About 73 Years, Resident Of Lodha House, Naya Bazar, Ajmer-305001 (Rajasthan). Receiver Of M/s. Kawalnain Hamirsingh Lodha (HUF). ----Petitioner Versus
1. Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Finance (Department Of Revenue), North Block, New Delhi -
110001.
2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-Ii, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur-302005.
3. Director General Of Income Tax (Systems), Q.No.C-8, Type-Via, Tower-10, New Moti Bagh, New Delhi. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Mehta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ramvijay Singh & Mr. Saurav Mehta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shantanu Sharma with Mr. Aditya Doda Mr. Arnav Singh for Mr. Sandeep Pathak HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA
Order 24/03/2025 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (ORAL):-
1. This petition is filed seeking quashing of e-mail dated 02.06.2020 issued by Income Tax Department whereby the petitioner has been directed to apply for Permanent Account Number (PAN) under Section 160 and 168 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).
[2025:RJ-JP:13105-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-15971/2023]
2. The petitioner is a receiver appointed by the Calcutta High Court vide order dated 03.11.2011 for M/s. Kawalnain Hamir Singh Lodha, Ajmer (HUF).
3. The grievance raised is that Section 168 of the Act deals with the state of deceased and shall not be applicable to the case in hand as the petitioner is a receiver appointed by the Court.
4.
Learned counsel for respondents relying upon the reply filed submits that amendment is required to the PAN as the petitioner is to be depicted as representative of HUF being covered under Section 160(1)(iii) of the Act.
5. Learned Senior counsel at the stage submits that the system is not accepting the application for such an amendment.
6. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with direction that the petitioner shall apply for PAN as per the provision of Section 160(1)(iii) of the Act. In case there is a glitch in the system for accepting such an application, the application be made manually which shall be considered by the department in accordance with law expeditiously.
(MANEESH SHARMA),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Riya/Deepa/38