Authorised Representative Of The Petitioner v. Union Of India
High Court
19 Mar 2021 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · rhcjodh240618
Parties
Authorised Representative Of The Petitioner v. Union Of India
Date of order
19 Mar 2021
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Authorised Representative Of The Petitioner v. Union Of India, the High Court (2021) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having becomeinfructuous.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN ATJODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7399/2019
1. M/s. N. Sarda And Associates Consultants Pvt. Ltd.,Behind State Bank Of India, Gangashahar Road, Bikaner.(Represented By Mrs. Sarita Sarda W/o Mr. Nirmal KumarSarda, Aged 35 Years , Being The Director Of PetitionerNo. 1 And Partner / Authorised Representative BeforeDissolution Of The Petitioner No. 2 And Partner /Authorised Representative Of The Petitioner No. 3Respectively).Behind State Bank Of India, Gangashahar Road, Bikaner.(Represented By Mrs. Sarita Sarda W/o Mr. Nirmal KumarSarda, Aged 35 Years , Being The Director Of PetitionerNo. 1 And Partner / Authorised Representative BeforeDissolution Of The Petitioner No. 2 And Partner /Authorised Representative Of The Petitioner No. 3Respectively).
2. M/s Asha International, Behind State Bank Of India,Gangashahar Road, Bikaner. (Represented By Mrs. SaritaSarda W/o Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sarda, Aged 35 Years ,Being The Director Of Petitioner No. 1 And Partner /Authorised Representative Before Dissolution Of ThePetitioner No. 2 And Partner / Authorised RepresentativeOf The Petitioner No. 3 Respectively).Gangashahar Road, Bikaner. (Represented By Mrs. SaritaSarda W/o Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sarda, Aged 35 Years ,Being The Director Of Petitioner No. 1 And Partner /Authorised Representative Before Dissolution Of ThePetitioner No. 2 And Partner / Authorised RepresentativeOf The Petitioner No. 3 Respectively).
3. M/s Pds International, Behind State Bank Of India,Gangashahar Road, Bikaner. (Represented By Mrs. SaritaSarda W/o Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sarda, Aged 35 Years ,Being The Director Of Petitioner No. 1 And Partner /Authorised Representative Before Dissolution Of ThePetitioner No. 2 And Partner / Authorised RepresentativeOf The Petitioner No. 3 Respectively).Gangashahar Road, Bikaner. (Represented By Mrs. SaritaSarda W/o Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sarda, Aged 35 Years ,Being The Director Of Petitioner No. 1 And Partner /Authorised Representative Before Dissolution Of ThePetitioner No. 2 And Partner / Authorised RepresentativeOf The Petitioner No. 3 Respectively).
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Principal Commissioner OfIncome Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, Rani Bazar, Bikaner,Rajasthan.Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, Rani Bazar, Bikaner,Rajasthan.
2. The Income Tax Officer (Tech.), Office Of The PrincipalCommissioner Of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, RaniBazar, Bikaner, Rajasthan.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, RaniBazar, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Nitin Trivedi.For Respondent(s): Ms.Surbhi Bissa for Mr.KK Bissa.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
19/03/2021
In wake of onslaught of COVID-19 abundant caution is beingtaken while hearing the matters in Court.
The matter comes up on an application (Inward No.01/2021)for the disposal of the writ petition as having become infructuoussince the impugned order itself has been withdrawn.
For the reasons mentioned, the application is allowed.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having becomeinfructuous.
Stay petition and all pending applications also standdismissed accordingly.
86-Jitender/-
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.