SONU DUSAD, W/O NITIN DUSAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

CW/10173/2024HC RajasthanRJHC02051051202405 July 2024Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition with the liberty as prayed for by the petitioner. The court acknowledged that the petitioner was not pressing the petition with the liberty to file an appeal. It was noted that the limitation for filing the appeal had expired, and there was a dispute regarding the service of notice and draft order. The court directed that if the petitioner files an appeal accompanied by an application for condonation of delay, it would be considered sympathetically in accordance with the law. Furthermore, the Commissioner (Appeals) was directed to endeavor to decide the appeal expeditiously, but not later than six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. The court did not decide on the merits of the case.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sonu Dusad, through her Power of Attorney Holder, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The respondents were various Income Tax authorities, including the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1. The petitioner sought relief concerning an appeal where the limitation period had expired. The petitioner also raised disputes regarding the service of notice and draft order and requested a time-bound decision from the Commissioner (Appeals). The petition was filed on July 5, 2024.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file an appeal despite the expiry of the limitation period, considering disputes regarding service of notice and draft order? 2. Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) should be directed to decide the appeal within a specific timeframe? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the limitation period for filing an appeal had expired. They also contended that there was a dispute concerning the service of notice and the draft order. The petitioner sought liberty to file an appeal and requested a time-bound decision from the Commissioner (Appeals). Revenue's Contentions: No specific contentions were recorded for the revenue in the provided judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2024:RJ-JP:28039-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10173/2024 Sonu Dusad, W/o Nitin Dusad, Aged About 47 Years, R/o 8Th Floor, Tower 11, Celestial Heights, 80 Sheung Shing Street, Homantin, Kowloom, Hongkok, Through Power Of Attorney Holder, Mrs. Prem Lata Dusad, W/o Bhagwan Das Dusad, R/o 4300, Nath Mal Ji Ka Chowk, Kgb Ka Rasta, Johri Bazaar, Jaipur City, Jaipur - 302003 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Income Tax Officer, Ito Wd 1(3), New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302005 2. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Dcit, Central Circle- 1, Room No. 408, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302005 3. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -1, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Nidhi-2, Lic Building, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302005 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Prakul Khurana with Mr.Rajat Sharma and Mr.Akshay Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr.Siddharth Bapna with Mr.Sarvesh Jain and Ms.Kriti Kalawatiya Mr.Meyhul Mittal Mr.Anuroop Singhi with Mr.Aditya Khandelwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 05/07/2024 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing at some length is not pressing the petition with liberty to file appeal. The prayer made is that the limitation for filing appeal has expired. It

[2024:RJ-JP:28039-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-10173/2024] is further submitted that there is a dispute with regard to service of notice and draft order and the CIT be directed for a time bound decision. 2. The petition is disposed of, with the liberty as prayed for. 3. There is no doubt in the eventuality of petitioner filing an appeal accompanied by the application for condonation of delay, the same would be considered in accordance with law sympathetically. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) shall make an endeavour to decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible in the facts of the case but not later than six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 5. The petition is disposed of accordingly. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Monika/Aarzoo/11

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →