PRAVEEN GARG S/O HARISH CHAND GARG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

PDF · subscribers
CW/12556/2024HC RajasthanRJHC02064607202424 March 2025Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,MANEESH SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petitions as 'not pressed'. The petitioner, after arguing at some length, sought permission to withdraw the petitions with the liberty to approach the department for the supply of reasons and the material relied upon. This request was granted by the Court, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer And Ors. The Court held that if the petitioner approaches the department for seeking information, it would be considered in accordance with law expeditiously. No specific finding was made on the merits of the original grievance, as the petitions were withdrawn. The operative direction was to allow the petitioner to approach the department and for the department to consider the request expeditiously.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Praveen Garg, filed three Civil Writ Petitions (Nos. 12563/2024, 12556/2024, and 12566/2024) before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. The respondent in all petitions was the Income Tax Officer, Wards 1(1), Alwar. The petitions challenged certain actions or orders of the Income Tax Department. The procedural history indicates that the petitioner's counsel argued the matter at length before the High Court.

What were the issues?

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to approach the department for the supply of reasons and material relied upon in the context of the assessment proceedings. The petitioner argued that they should be provided with the reasons and material used against them, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer And Ors. The respondent's contentions are not explicitly recorded in the judgment, but the context implies they were defending their actions or the lack of prior disclosure of reasons and material. The core of the dispute revolved around procedural fairness and the right to information in tax proceedings.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2025:RJ-JP:13220-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12563/2024 Praveen Garg, S/o Shri Harish Chand Garg, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Plot No. 51, Basant Vihar, Alwar- 301001, Rajasthan, India. ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer Wards 1(1), Alwar, Income Tax Office, C R Building, Motidoongri Road, Alwar, Rajasthan- 301001 ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12556/2024 Praveen Garg S/o Harish Chand Garg, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Plot No. 51, Basant Vihar, Alwar - 301001, Rajasthan, India. ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer, Wards 1(1), Alwar, Income Tax Office, Cr Building, Moti Doongri Road, Alwar, Rajasthan-301001 ----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12566/2024 Praveen Garg S/o Shri Harish Chand Garg, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Plot No. 51, Basant Vihar, Alwar 301001, Rajasthan, India. ----Petitioner Versus Income Tax Officer Wards 1(1), Alwar, Income Tax Office, C R Building, Moti Doongri Road, Alwar, Rajasthan- 301001. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Gunjan Pathak with Mr.Kanishk Singhal For Respondent(s) : Mr.Anuroop Singhi with Mr.N.S.Bhati & Mr.Aditya Khandelwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA

[2025:RJ-JP:13220-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-12563/2024] Order 24/03/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing at some length is not pressing the petitions with liberty to approach the department for supply of reasons and the material relied upon in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gkn Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer And Ors. reported in 259 ITR Page 19. 2. The petitions are disposed of as not pressed with liberty as prayed for. 3. There is no doubt in the eventuality of petitioner approaching the department for seeking information, the same would be considered in accordance with law expeditiously. 4. All pending application(s) stands disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Monika/62-64

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →