SHRI VINAYAK MEGATRADES PVT. LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

CW/6341/2022HC RajasthanRJHC02033065202203 March 2025Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,BHUWAN GOYAL1 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the petitioner cannot be allowed to pursue two concurrent remedies. The Court observed that the petitioner had already filed an appeal, which is an alternative remedy. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed. The Court explicitly stated that the issue remains open for consideration in the appeal. No specific amount in dispute or assessment year was mentioned in the judgment. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition, leaving the issue open for appellate consideration.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Shri Vinayak Megatrades Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. 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 order or action by the revenue authorities. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner had already availed an alternative remedy by filing an appeal. The High Court noted this fact in its order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to pursue a writ petition when an alternative remedy of appeal has already been availed (mixed question of law and fact). Contentions: Assessee: The petitioner had approached the High Court via a writ petition. Revenue: The learned counsel for the respondents stated that the petitioner had already taken up the alternative remedy and filed an appeal. The revenue contended that the petitioner cannot pursue two concurrent remedies.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JP:9005-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6341/2022 Shri Vinayak Megatrades Pvt. Ltd., Laxman Singh Block, Jhotwara Road, Opp. Durga Kanta, Jaipur-302013 (Rajasthan) Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Vikram Singh, Age 35 Yrs. S/o Sh. Yogendra Singh. ----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) : Mr. Harsh Sharma on behalf of Mr. Pankaj Ghiya through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi with Mr. NS Bhati HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 03/03/2025 1. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has already taken up alternative remedy and filed appeal, we are of the view that the petitioner cannot be allowed to take two concurrent remedies. 2. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed leaving the issue open for consideration in appeal. Pending application, if any, also stands dismissed. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ KAMLESH KUMAR-RAHUL/1 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 04/03/2025 at 06:14:31 PM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:40:11 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →