Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kishangarh, Ajmer v. Dharmendra Gupta (Huf)
High Court
24 Feb 2022 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kishangarh, Ajmer v. Dharmendra Gupta (Huf)
Date of order
24 Feb 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kishangarh, Ajmer v. Dharmendra Gupta (Huf), the High Court (2022) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 402/2022
Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kishangarh, Ajmer.
----Appellant
Versus
Dharmendra Gupta (Huf), Through Its Karta Shri DharmendraGupta S/o Sh. Babu Lal Gupta, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Opp,Laxmi Narayan Mandir, Ajmer Road, Madanganj, Kishangarh,Ajmer - 305801 (Raj.)
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Parinitoo Jain through VCFor Respondent(s):
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
24/02/2022
Defects are waived.
The appeal is filed by the revenue to challenge the judgmentof the learned Single Judge dated 02.12.2021 quashing a notice ofreopening of assessment issued by the assessing officer after01.04.2021 but for a period prior to the said date. Under identicalcircumstances in group of petitions lead case being SudeshTaneja Vs. Income Tax Officer and Anr. (D.B. Civil WritPetition No. 969/2022) decided on 27.01.2022, petitions ofthe assessees were allowed and appeals of the revenue weredismissed.
Without recording separate reasons therefore this appeal isalso dismissed. Pending applications stand disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J(AKIL KURESHI),CJ
Kamlesh Kumar/S-102
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.