SANJAY KUMAR JAIN SON OF SHRI MAHVEER KUMAR AGARWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

CW/3455/2026HC RajasthanRJHC02017404202627 May 2026Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Court held that the petitioner had not filed the amended writ petition within the stipulated time, despite the clear directions issued on May 5, 2026, which were based on a Supreme Court judgment. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition. The reasoning was based on the non-compliance with the procedural direction. The ratio decidendi is that failure to comply with court orders, especially those referencing higher judicial pronouncements, leads to dismissal of the petition. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition and all pending applications. No issues were left undecided; the petition was disposed of on procedural grounds.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar Jain, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The respondent was the Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(4), Jaipur. On May 5, 2026, the Court directed petitioners to amend their writ petitions within four weeks, referencing 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 deadline for amendment was May 25, 2026. The case was listed for further hearing on May 27, 2026, with any interim orders to continue. The Court noted that 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, in light of the Supreme Court's directions in SLP (C). Diary No(s). 2196/2026, Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. Vs. Tej Partap Singh. Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the petitioner regarding the failure to amend the petition or any arguments against the dismissal. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the respondent Revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2026:RJ-JP:22841-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3455/2026 Sanjay Kumar Jain Son Of Shri Mahveer Kumar Agarwal, Aged About 58 Years, Resident Of B-228, Kirti Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018 ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(4), Jaipur, Having Its Address At New Cerntral Revenue Building Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302005 ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Satvika Jha and Mr. Rohan Chatter on behalf of Mr. Siddarth Ranka For Respondent(s) : Ms. Jaya P. Pathak and Mr. Arnav Singh on behalf of Mr. Sandeep Pathak 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 116/DivyaP

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →