VINOD KUMAR GOYAL S/O SHRI MANI SHANKAR GOYAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/2233/2026HC RajasthanRJHC02010013202627 May 2026Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal decided that the writ petition should be dismissed. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's failure to comply with the Court's explicit direction dated May 5, 2026, which mandated the amendment of the writ petition within four weeks, by May 25, 2026. This direction was issued in light of a Supreme Court judgment. Since the petitioner did not file the amended petition within the stipulated time, the Court found no alternative but to dismiss the writ petition. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition and all pending applications.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Vinod Kumar Goyal, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The respondent was the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur. On May 5, 2026, the Court directed petitioners to amend their petitions within four weeks, by May 25, 2026, in light of a Supreme Court judgment in SLP (C). Diary No(s). 2196/2026, titled Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. Vs. Tej Partap Singh. The matter was listed for May 27, 2026, with any interim orders to continue. However, the petitioner failed to file the amended writ petition within the stipulated time.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-compliance with the Court's order dated May 5, 2026, directing the amendment of the petition within four weeks. The petitioner's side, represented by Ms. Satvika Jha and Mr. Rohan Chatter on behalf of Mr. Siddharth Ranka, did not present arguments on this specific issue as the petition was dismissed for non-compliance. The respondent's side, represented by Mr. Siddharth Bapna with Ms. Tanushka Saxena, argued for dismissal due to the petitioner's failure to amend the petition as directed. The Court's decision hinges on the procedural compliance with its earlier order.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2026:RJ-JP:22819-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2233/2026 Vinod Kumar Goyal S/o Shri Mani Shankar Goyal, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of 1/35, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur 302012 ----Petitioner Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur, Having Its Address 408, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-Ii, Lic Building, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur-302005. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Satvika Jha & Mr. Rohan Chatter on behalf of Mr. Siddharth Ranka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna with Ms. Tanushka Saxena HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU (Through V.C.) Order 27/05/2026 1. This Court on 05.05.2026 has passed the following order:- “1. In view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (C). Diary No(s). 2196/2026, titled as Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. Vs. Tej Partap Singh decided on 10.04.2026 and stated to have been uploaded on 28.04.2026, we give four weeks' time, as directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, to the respective petitioners in each of the writ petitions listed before us to amend their petitions on or before 25.05.2026, if they so choose to. 2. List these cases on 27.05.2026. 3. Interim order, if any, shall continue till next date of hearing.” 2. Despite the aforesaid direction, the petitioner has not filed the amended writ petition within the stipulated time. 3. In view of above, the present writ petition stands dismissed. 4. All pending applications also stand dismissed. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ 65-DivyaP

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →