GEETA AGARWAL WIFE OF SHRI NAVRATAN AGARWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

CW/14794/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02079256202208 May 2025Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,MUKESH RAJPUROHIT1 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal (High Court) held that the writ petition had become infructuous. This decision was based on the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The counsel stated that an interim order was granted, and subsequently, the petitioner's return of income was accepted during the pendency of the writ petition. Consequently, the petition was disposed of as having become infructuous. No specific reasoning beyond accepting the petitioner's submission is provided. The ratio decidendi is that if the underlying issue of a writ petition is resolved by subsequent events, such as the acceptance of a return, the petition can be disposed of as infructuous. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Geeta Agarwal, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The petition was filed against the Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-2, and the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The specific assessment year(s) and the nature of the order or action under challenge are not explicitly detailed in the provided text. However, it is stated that an interim order was granted during the pendency of the writ petition. Subsequently, the petitioner's return of income was accepted.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition has become infructuous due to the acceptance of the petitioner's return of income during the pendency of the petition? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an interim order was granted, and during the pendency of the writ petition, the return of income has been accepted. Therefore, the petition has rendered infructuous. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the respondents regarding the infructuousness of the petition. The focus is on the submission made by the petitioner's counsel.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JP:19472-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14794/2022 Geeta Agarwal Wife Of Shri Navratan Agarwal, Aged About 67 Years, Resident Of B-215, Laxmi Narayan Puri, Suraj Pole, Jaipur-302003. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur Having Its Address At New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur. 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jaipur-2, Jaipur Having Its Address At New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur. 3. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi, Through Its Chairman. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranka with Ms. Apeksha Bapna & Mr. Rohan Chatter For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak with Mr. Palash Gupta HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT Order 08/05/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an interim order granted and during the pendency of the writ petition, the return income has been accepted, therefore, the petition has rendered infructuous. 2. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of as having become infructuous. (MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ RAJAT/ANAND TANWAR/26 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 09/05/2025 at 02:47:28 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:39:05 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →