RAM SINGH MEENA S/O SH. RAM KRAN MEENA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/9400/2023HC Rajasthan2023:RJ-JP:1706608 August 2023Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, PRAVEER BHATNAGAR2 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Another Versus M/S. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. (supra), which remained operative, the writ petition deserved to be disposed of. Consequently, the property in dispute, measuring 0.52 hectares in Village-Khorameena, Tehsil-Amer, District-Jaipur, Rajasthan (Khasra Nos. 1563 and 1564), was directed to be released. The court clarified that this release would be subject to any final order that might be passed by the Supreme Court in the pending review petition. The operative direction was to take necessary steps for the release of the disputed property. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Ram Singh Meena, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The petition challenged an action by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Benami Prohibition) and Initiating Officer, and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Benami Prohibition), Jaipur. The dispute pertains to a property described as 0.52 hectares in Village-Khorameena, Tehsil-Amer, District-Jaipur, Rajasthan, identified by Khasra Nos. 1563 and 1564. The petitioner argued that the issue raised in his petition had been decided by the Supreme Court. The respondents acknowledged the Supreme Court's decision but stated that a review petition was pending.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the property in dispute should be released in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Another Versus M/S. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2022 SC 4558? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that the issue before the court had been conclusively decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Another Versus M/S. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. (supra), implying the property should be released. Revenue's Contention: The respondents submitted that while the Supreme Court had decided the issue in the cited case, a review petition against that judgment was pending before the Supreme Court. However, they could not dispute that the Supreme Court's order remained operative.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2023:RJ-JP:17066] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9400/2023 Ram Singh Meena S/o Sh. Ram Karan Meena, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Village And Post - Mainpura, Tehsil And District - Sawai Madhopur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Benami Prohibition) And Initiating Officer, Under PBPT Act-1988 For State Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Room No. - NA -103, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur-302001. 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Benami Prohibition), Jaipur, Room No. 250, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jaideep Malik, Advocate for Mr. Javed Khan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 08/08/2023 Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue raised in this petition has been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Another Versus M/S. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2022 SC 4558. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, would submit that though the Hon’ble Supreme Court has decided the issue in (Uploaded on 16/08/2023 at 10:53:42 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:27:32 AM)

[2023:RJ-JP:17066] (2 of 2) [CW-9400/2023] the aforesaid case, review petition has been filed which is pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, could not dispute that the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Another Versus M/S. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. (supra) remains operative and has not been decided so far. In view of the above, this petition also deserves to be disposed off and accordingly, the property in dispute being “0.52 hectares [Khasra No.1563 and 1564 (having total area of 0.52 hectares)] of Village-Khorameena, Tehsil- Amer, District- Jaipur, Rajasthan” deserves to be released. Let necessary steps be taken to release the disputed property. It is, however, made clear that the release will be subject to the final order that may ultimately be passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the pending review petition. Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed off. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J Karan/14 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 16/08/2023 at 10:53:42 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 10:27:32 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →