SWETA JAIN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHILWARA
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the petitioner appeared to be not interested in pursuing the matter. This conclusion was based on the petitioner's consistent non-appearance on multiple hearing dates and the failure to deposit process fees and notice, which led to the automatic vacation of the interim order granted in her favour. Consequently, the Court found it appropriate to dismiss the petition for non-prosecution. No decision was made on the merits of the case.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, Sweta Jain, filed a Civil Writ Petition before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur. The respondent was the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhilwara. The petitioner had previously obtained an interim order in her favour. However, on multiple hearing dates, including February 1, 2023, and May 9, 2023, the learned counsel for the petitioner did not appear. Despite being granted time, the petitioner also failed to deposit the process fees and notice. Consequently, the interim order in favour of the petitioner stood automatically vacated due to non-compliance.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution, considering the petitioner's consistent non-appearance and failure to comply with court orders regarding process fees and notice. Contentions: Assessee: No arguments recorded as none were present. Revenue: No arguments recorded as none were present.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[2023:RJ-JD:21257-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17701/2021 Sweta Jain D/o Shri Nirmal Kumar Jain, Aged About 37 Years, Having Address At Choudhary Sadan, Hameer Colony, Roopangarh Road, Madanganj Kishangarh, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305801. ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhilwara, Having Its Address At Kawa Khera, Shashtri Nagar, Bhilwara, Rajasthan 311001. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : None present. For Respondent(s) : -- HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR Order 13/07/2023 On 01.02.2023 and 09.05.2023, learned counsel for the petitioner had not put in appearance nor has despite time being granted deposited the process fees and notice. Even the interim order, which was passed in favour of the petitioner, stands vacated automatically because of non-compliance of the order. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the matter.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed for non-prosecution. (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH),CJ 33-a.asopa/- Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 14/07/2023 at 02:24:33 PM) (Downloaded on 28/10/2026 at 12:02:29 AM)
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Sujit Paswan @ Sujit Pasman vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026