KAILASH CHAND HIRAWAT S/O KEWAL CHAND HIRAWAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petitions was squarely covered by its common order dated March 19, 2024, in the case of Shyam Sunder Khandelwal Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and other connected writ petitions. Consequently, the court allowed these petitions in similar terms as the precedent case. The judgment also grants liberty to the parties as stated in the Shyam Sunder Khandelwal order. The specific relief granted or the exact reasoning from the Shyam Sunder Khandelwal case is not detailed in this excerpt, but the operative direction is to allow the petitions based on the prior ruling. No issues were expressly left undecided.
What were the facts?
The judgment concerns multiple writ petitions filed by various individuals (Bimla Kumari Hirawat, Mahendra Verma, Kailash Chand Hirawat, Prakash Chand Hirawat, Kalpana Khatoria, and Bitthal Das Maheswari) against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4, Jaipur. The petitioners are challenging orders or actions taken by the Income Tax Department. The specific assessment years and the exact nature of the orders under challenge are not detailed in this excerpt. The procedural history is limited to the fact that these petitions were filed before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur.
What were the issues?
The primary issue before the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court was whether the petitions were covered by a previous common order passed by the same court. The court had to decide if the facts and legal questions presented in these writ petitions were identical or analogous to those decided in the case of Shyam Sunder Khandelwal Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The petitioners, represented by their counsel, jointly submitted that the issue was squarely covered by the aforementioned order. The respondent revenue did not present any arguments contrary to this joint submission. The court was therefore tasked with determining the applicability of the precedent set in the Shyam Sunder Khandelwal case to the present petitions.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order
[2024:RJ-JP:23864-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-9564/2021] 20/05/2024 No.18363/2019 and other connected writ petitions). Accordingly, these petitions are also allowed in similar terms with liberty as stated in that case. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ N.Gandhi/Anu /115-120
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026