DEEPTI AGRAWAL, D/O SHRI MANI RAM DADU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/2683/2026HC RajasthanRJHC02012542202627 May 2026Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition. The Court observed that despite a clear direction issued on 05.05.2026, requiring the petitioner to amend their writ petition by 25.05.2026 in accordance with the Supreme Court's judgment in SLP (C). Diary No(s). 2196/2026, Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. Vs. Tej Partap Singh, the petitioner failed to comply with this order. Consequently, the Court found no alternative but to dismiss the petition for non-compliance. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition and all pending applications. No specific issue regarding the merits of the original petition was decided.

What were the facts?

This is a writ petition filed by Deepti Agrawal (the petitioner) against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 4, Jaipur (the respondent). The High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur, had previously ordered on 05.05.2026 that petitioners in listed writ petitions should amend their petitions within four weeks, by 25.05.2026, in light of a judgment by the Supreme Court 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 27.05.2026. The Court noted that despite this direction, 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 05.05.2026, which directed petitioners to amend their petitions within four weeks by 25.05.2026, in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in SLP (C). Diary No(s). 2196/2026, Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. Vs. Tej Partap Singh? The petitioner's side (represented by Ms. Satvika Jha & Mr. Rohan Chatter on behalf of Mr. Siddharth Ranka) did not present any arguments 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.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2026:RJ-JP:22854-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2683/2026 Deepti Agrawal, D/o Shri Mani Ram Dadu, Aged About 63 Years, R/o D-70, Jln Marg, Nera Teen Murti Circle, Arjun Lal Sethi Nagar, S.o Jaipur-302004, Through Her Authorised Signatory Shri Sudhir Naruka, Aged About 29 Years, S/o Shri Brijendra Singh, R/o C-208, Tara Nagar-C, Khirni Phatak, Jhotwara, Jaipur- 302012 ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle - 4, Jaipur Having Its Address At Room No. 416, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur ----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 91-DivyaP

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →