PUSTIKAR LAGHU VYAPARIK PBESSS LTD., vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX and ANR

PDF · subscribers
CW/3022/2012HC RajasthanRJHC01018621201202 August 2024Author: SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR,KULDEEP MATHUR2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted the joint submission by learned counsel for both parties that during the pendency of the writ petition, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, vide its order dated March 18, 2015, had set aside the order of the Assessing Authority. Crucially, the CIT(A) had directed the Assessing Authority to allow the deduction to the petitioner under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the writ petition was rendered infructuous. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original assessment or the demand, as the subsequent order of the CIT(A) had already provided relief to the petitioner by directing the allowance of deduction under Section 80P, thereby nullifying the need for the writ petition to proceed.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Pustikar Laghu Vyaparik Pratishhan Bachat Evam Sakh Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Jodhpur, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated March 22, 2012, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) directing the deposit of 50% of a demand note. The petitioner also sought to quash the assessment order dated February 21, 2011. The writ petition was filed before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur. The proceedings were initiated by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Jodhpur, and the appeal was heard by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jodhpur.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order dated March 22, 2012, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) directing the deposit of 50% of the demand note is liable to be quashed and set aside? (Question of law) 2. Whether the assessment order dated February 21, 2011, is liable to be quashed and set aside? (Question of law) Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner prayed for the quashing of both the CIT(A)'s order regarding the 50% demand deposit and the assessment order. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not explicitly record any contentions in the provided judgment. However, the joint submission by both parties indicates a subsequent development that rendered the petition infructuous.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2024:RJ-JD:32173-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3022/2012 Pustikar Laghu Vyaparik Pratishhan Bachat Evam Sakh Sahkari Simiti Ltd., Jodhpur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Jodhpur 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Jodhpur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mrs. Abhilasha Bora For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order 02/08/2024 The Writ Petition has been preferred by the petitioner with the following prayer :- “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be allowed and - (I) The order dated 22-03-12 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jodhpur by which direction has been given to deposit 50% of the demand note may be quashed and set aside. (II) The assessment order dated 21.2.11 (Annexure P-4) may be quashed and set aside. (III) Any other appropriate order or direction which may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

2.

Learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that during pendency of the present writ petition, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1 vide its order dated 18th March 2015 passed in Appeal No.397/2011-2012 has set aside the order of the Assessing Authority and directed the Assessing Authority to allow

[2024:RJ-JD:32173-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-3022/2012] deduction to the petitioner under section 80P of the Act, therefore, the Writ Petition has rendered infructuous. In view of the aforesaid submission made at Bar by learned counsel for the parties, D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3022/2012 is dismissed as having become infructuous. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J (SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR),J 34-AjaySingh/-

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →