ROHITABH SONI S/O SH. UPENDRA KUMAR SONI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/4619/2020HC RajasthanRJHC02021094202006 March 2025Author: AVNEESH JHINGAN,MANEESH SHARMA6 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court, without commenting on the merits of the case, disposed of the writ petitions. The court took into account the fact that interim protection had been in favour of the petitioners since 2020 and that their appeals had not been decided for over four years. Consequently, the Court directed the first Appellate Authority to decide the appeals within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The interim protection granted to the petitioners was extended to continue until the appeals are heard and decided. The court's reasoning was primarily based on the inordinate delay in the disposal of appeals and the need for expeditious resolution, rather than a determination on the validity of the 20% deposit demand itself.

What were the facts?

These are multiple writ petitions filed before the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur. The petitioners are aggrieved by orders directing them to deposit 20% of the demand created by the Income Tax Department. Interim protection was granted to the petitioners when notice of motion was issued. The court notes that the appeals have not been decided for over four years since the interim protection was granted in 2020. The petitions involve various individuals and a private limited company as petitioners, and Assistant Commissioners of Income Tax and the Central Board of Direct Taxes as respondents.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, should interfere with an order directing the deposit of 20% of the tax demand, considering the pendency of appeals before the appellate authorities? Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argued that the demand for 20% deposit was arbitrary and that they had been granted interim protection since 2020, with their appeals remaining undecided for over four years. They sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of their appeals. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the merits of the 20% deposit demand or the delay in appeal disposal. The focus of the order is on the procedural aspect of appeal disposal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JP:9995-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4620/2020 Rohitabh Soni S/o Sh. Upendra Kumar Soni, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of 19-D, New Colony, Gumanpura, Kota. ----Petitioner Versus

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota Having Its Office At Razad Building Cad Circle, Kota.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman ----Respondents Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3644/2020 Paras Kuhad, Son Of Late Shri Mithalal Jain, Aged About 65 Years, Having His Address At 307-309, Ganpati Plaza, M.i. Road, Jaipur 302001 ----Petitioner Versus

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 7, Jaipur Having Its Office At Sidhnath Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar Scheme, Lal Kothi Scheme, Behind New Vidhansabha, Janpath, Jaipur

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2246/2020 Satwiki Proteins Private Limited, Having Its Registered Address At E-166, Riico Industrial Area, P.o. Ajitgarh, District Sikar 332701 Through Its Authorized Signatory Shri Vivek Kumar Agarwal S/o Shri Narottam Lal Agarwal ----Petitioner Versus

Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur Having Its Office At New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur 302005

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At

[2025:RJ-JP:9995-DB] (2 of 6) [CW-4620/2020] North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2636/2020 Trust Marketing, Having Its Address At Cc-207, Gole Market, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur Through Its Partner Shri Hitendra Atlani. ----Petitioner Versus

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 6, Jaipur Having Its Office At New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi, Through Its Chairman. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3085/2020 Peeyush Agarwal Son Of Shri Mahendra Kumar Agarwal, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of 197, Johri Bazar, Jaipur In The State Of Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus

Income-Tax Officer, Ward -1(5), Jaipur Having Its Office At New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4089/2020 Shri Upendra Kumar Soni S/o Sh. Goverdhan Lal Soni, Aged About 54 Years, Resident Of 19-D, New Colony, Gumanpura, Kota. ----Petitioner Versus

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota Having Its Office At Razad Building Cad Circle, Kota.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman ----Respondents

[2025:RJ-JP:9995-DB] (3 of 6) [CW-4620/2020] D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4090/2020 Rohitabh Soni S/o Sh. Upendra Kumar Soni, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of 19-D, New Colony, Gumanpura, Kota. ----Petitioner Versus

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota Having Its Office At Razad Building Cad Circle, Kota.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4091/2020 Smt. Shalini Soni W/o Sh. Upendra Kumar Soni, Aged About 49 Years, Resident Of 19-D, New Colony, Gumanpura, Kota. ----Petitioner Versus

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota Having Its Office At Razad Building Cad Circle, Kota.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4611/2020 Shri Upendra Kumar Soni S/o Sh. Goverdhan Lal Soni, Aged About 54 Years, Resident Of 19-D, New Colony, Gumanpura, Kota. ----Petitioner Versus

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota Having Its Office At Razad Building Cad Circle, Kota.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4619/2020 Rohitabh Soni S/o Sh. Upendra Kumar Soni, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of 19-D, New Colony, Gumanpura, Kota. ----Petitioner Versus

[2025:RJ-JP:9995-DB] (4 of 6) [CW-4620/2020]

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota Having Its Office At Razad Building Cad Circle, Kota.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4654/2020 Rohitabh Soni S/o Sh. Upendra Kumar Soni, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of 19-D, New Colony, Gumanpura, Kota. ----Petitioner Versus

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota Having Its Office At Razad Building Cad Circle, Kota.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman. ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4663/2020 Shri Upendra Kumar Soni S/o Sh. Goverdhan Lal Soni, Aged About 54 Years, Resident Of 19-D, New Colony, Gumanpura, Kota. ----Petitioner Versus

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota Having Its Office At Razad Building Cad Circle, Kota.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4718/2020 Mukesh Soni S/o Surendra Soni, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of 35, Near Govind Dev Ji Temple, Janta Market, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus

Income Tax Officer, Ward -5 (1), Jaipur, Having Its Office At New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, C-Scheme, Jaipur.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Having Its Address At North Block, New Delhi Through Its Chairman.

[2025:RJ-JP:9995-DB] (5 of 6) [CW-4620/2020] ----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4723/2020 Khandaka Sons Jewellers, Having Its Registered Address At Shop No. 377, 378, M.i. Road, Jaipur 302001 Through Its Partner And Authorized Representative Mr. Kuber Khandaka. ----Petitioner Versus

Income Tax Officer, Ward -2 (2), Jaipur, Having Its Office At New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, C-Scheme, Jaipur In The State Of Rajasthan.

Central Board Of Direct Taxes, 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. Siddharth Bapna with Mr. Meyhul Mittal Mr. Rahul Kumar Mr. Sandeep Pathak Mr. N.S. Bhati for Mr. Anuroop Singhi HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 06/03/2025

These petitions are being decided by common order as the facts involved are similar.

These petitions are filed aggrieved of the order directing the petitioners to deposit 20% of the demand created.

While issuing notice of motion, interim protection was granted to the petitioners.

[2025:RJ-JP:9995-DB] (6 of 6) [CW-4620/2020]

Without commenting upon merits of the case, taking into account that there is interim protection in favour of the petitioners since 2020 and for more than last four years, the appeal has not been decided, the petitions are disposed of with direction to the first Appellate Authority to decide the appeal within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The interim protection shall continue till the appeal is heard. (MANEESH SHARMA),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Deepa/Chandan/74-87

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →