DG ENTERPRISES vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

CW/6327/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02033059202225 February 2025Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court noted that the petitioner was unrepresented despite two pass-overs. The learned counsel for the respondents informed the Court that a re-assessment order for assessment year 2018-19 was passed during the pendency of the writ petition, and the petitioner had challenged this order in an appeal, which was dismissed on December 28, 2024. In view of this submission, the Court dismissed the writ petition, relegating the petitioner to the alternative remedy in accordance with law. The Court also granted liberty to the petitioner to file an application for recalling the order if there was any factual discrepancy in the statement made by the respondents' counsel. The primary reasoning for dismissal was the availability and exhaustion of the alternative appellate remedy, rendering the writ petition infructuous or inappropriate for adjudication.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, DG Enterprises, through its proprietor Mr. Deepankar Gupta, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur. The respondents were the Income Tax Officer, Ward-I(1), Jaipur, and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jaipur. The writ petition challenged an action or order by the revenue. During the pendency of the writ petition, a re-assessment order for assessment year 2018-19 was passed, which was subsequently challenged by the petitioner in an appeal. This appeal was dismissed on December 28, 2024. The present writ petition was listed for hearing, and the petitioner remained unrepresented despite two pass-overs.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable in light of the alternative remedy available and exercised by the petitioner. 2. Whether the writ petition should be dismissed as infructuous or relegated to the alternative remedy, given the dismissal of the appeal against the re-assessment order. Assessee's contentions: None were recorded as the petitioner was unrepresented. Revenue's contentions: The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that a re-assessment order for assessment year 2018-19 was passed during the pendency of the writ petition, and the petitioner had challenged this order in an appeal, which was dismissed on December 28, 2024. Based on this development, the revenue likely argued for the dismissal of the writ petition, relegating the petitioner to the appropriate legal recourse.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JP:8542-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6327/2022 DG Enterprises, F - 174, Megha Marg, Janapath, Shyam Nagar Sodal, Jaipur- 302019 (Rajasthan) Through Its Proprietor Mr. Deepankar Gupta Age 31 Year, S/o. Sh. Devendra Kumar Gupta ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward-I(1), Jaipur 2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Ncrb Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Anuroop Singhi, Adv. with Mr.N.S. Bhati, Adv. & Mr.Aditya Khandelwal, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 25/02/2025 1. None present on behalf of petitioner inspite of two pass overs. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that during pendency of the petition re-assessment order passed for assessment year 2018-19 was challenged in the appeal, which was dismissed on 28.12.2024. 3. In view of the statement made, the writ petition is dismissed relegating the petitioner to the alternative remedy in accordance with law. 4. The petitioner shall be at liberty to file an application for recalling of the order in case there is factual discrepancy in the statement made by counsel for the respondents. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR), J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Himanshu Soni/24 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 03/03/2025 at 11:55:30 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:40:14 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →