PRASHANT GUPTA S/O SHRI GOPAL PRASAD GUPTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/12682/2025HC RajasthanRJHC02069950202504 November 2025Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court found that the grievance of the petitioner(s) had become academic as the return of income had been accepted by the department. Consequently, the Court closed the proceedings and disposed of all the petitions as having become otiose. The Court clarified that the questions raised in other petitions would not be affected by the disposal of these petitions. The operative direction was to dispose of the petitions as otiose.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Prashant Gupta, filed three Civil Writ Petitions before the Rajasthan High Court, Bench at Jaipur. The respondent was the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur. The petitions challenged the issuance of notices by the Income Tax Department. During the pendency of these petitions, the Revenue's counsel submitted that the issue raised had become academic because the department had accepted the assessee's returned income after the impugned notices were issued. The petitioner's counsel contended that the issuance of the notices themselves was invalid.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the issuance of the notices under challenge was bad in law, as argued by the petitioner. 2. Whether the petitions have become academic, rendering further proceedings unnecessary, as argued by the Revenue. The Revenue contended that the issue raised in the petitions had become academic because the department had accepted the returned income after the issuance of the impugned notices. Therefore, no further purpose would be served in keeping the matters pending. The petitioner argued that the issuance of the notices itself was bad.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JP:44289-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12427/2025 Prashant Gupta, S/o Shri Gopal Prasad Gupta, Aged About 50 Years, R/o 301, Anukampa Mansion, M.i. Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302001. ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Room No. 416, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi 2, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur Rajasthan-302005. ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12575/2025 Prashant Gupta S/o Shri Gopal Prasad Gupta, Aged About 50 Years, R/o 301, Anukampa Mansion, M.i. Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302001. ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Room No. 416, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi 2, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur Rajasthan-302005 ----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12682/2025 Prashant Gupta S/o Shri Gopal Prasad Gupta, Aged About 50 Years, R/o 301, Anukampa Mansion, M.i. Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302001. ----Petitioner Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Room No. 416, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi 2, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302005. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gunjan Pathak with Mr. Kanishk Singhal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna with Mr. Sarvesh Jain, Mr. Rahul Kumar & Ms. Tanushka Saxena

[2025:RJ-JP:44289-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-12427/2025] HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Order 04/11/2025 1. Learned counsel for the Revenue submits that the issue raised in these petitions has been rendered academic as the department has accepted the returned income, after issuance of the notices, which are impugned herein. In view thereto, no further purpose would be served in keeping these matters pending. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s), however, submits that the issuance of notice itself was bad. 3. We find that the grievance of the petitioner(s) has become academic, as the return has been accepted. 4. In view thereto, we close the proceedings and dispose of all the petitions as having become otiose. 5. It is made clear that the question raised in the other petitions would not be affected on account of disposal of these petitions. 6. Accordingly, these petitions stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 7. A copy of this order be placed in each connected file.

(BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ SANJAY KUMAWAT/RAJAT/40, 42 & 43

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →