SHREE BRAHMADEV REALESTATE LLP vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/2232/2026HC Rajasthan2026:RJ-JP:22782-DB27 May 2026Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the writ petition stood dismissed. This decision was based on the petitioner's failure to file the amended writ petition within the four-week period granted by the court on 05.05.2026, which was to be completed by 25.05.2026. The court had explicitly stated that the amendment was to be made if the petitioner chose to do so, but the subsequent order indicates non-compliance. The reasoning is procedural: the petitioner did not adhere to the court's directive. The ratio decidendi is that failure to comply with a court's order for amendment within the given time leads to the dismissal of the writ petition. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition and all pending applications.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shree Brahmadev Realestate Llp, through its partner Shri Nand Kishore Gupta, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The respondent was the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -1, Jaipur. The High Court, on 05.05.2026, had granted the petitioner four weeks to amend their writ petition, referencing a judgment of the Apex Court in SLP (C). Diary No(s). 2196/2026, titled Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. Vs. Tej Partap Singh. The amended petition was to be filed on or before 25.05.2026. The case was listed for further hearing on 27.05.2026, with any interim order to continue. However, the petitioner failed to file the amended writ petition within the stipulated time.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the writ petition should be dismissed due to the petitioner's failure to comply with the court's order to amend the petition within the specified timeframe. The court had directed the amendment in light of the Apex Court's judgment in Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Chandigarh & Ors. Vs. Tej Partap Singh. The petitioner's side, represented by Ms. Satvika Jha and Mr. Rohan Chatter, did not present any arguments as the petition was dismissed for non-compliance. The respondent's side, represented by Mr. Siddharth Bapna and Ms. Tanushka Saxena, did not need to argue on the merits of the case as the petition was dismissed on procedural grounds.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2026:RJ-JP:22782-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2232/2026 Shree Brahmadev Realestate Llp, Having Its Address At 6Th Floor, Apex Mall, Tonk Road, Lal Kothi, Jaipur 302015 Through Its Partner Shri Nand Kishore Gupta Aged About 69 Years Son Of Shri Rood Mal Gupta Resident Of D95, Madho Singh Circle, Bani Park, Jaipur 302016 ----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 and 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 12-DivyaP/- Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 09/06/2026 at 12:32:59 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:21:41 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →