Case Law › High Court › Manoj Lochib v. Manoj Kumar Sharma

Manoj Lochib v. Manoj Kumar Sharma

High Court 11 Aug 2023 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · jaipur

Parties

Date of order

11 Aug 2023

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Manoj Lochib v. Manoj Kumar Sharma, the High Court (2023) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In view of the statements made by counsel for the petitioner,the present 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 BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11216/2019 Manoj Lochib, Aged About 36 Years, Proprietor, RegisteredOffice- Opposite Side Of Income Tax Office, Khetri Road,Neemkathana, Sikar, (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus Manoj Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Ramgopal Sharma Proprietor M/sBansiya Auto Mobile, Shahpura Road, Neemkathana, Sikar (Raj.) ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Satvir Singh Rawat for Mr. Arpan Kumar SharmaFor Respondent(s): HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Judgment / Order 11/08/2023 Counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writpetition has become infructuous. In view of the statements made by counsel for the petitioner,the present writ petition is dismissed as having becomeinfructuous. Since the main petition has been dismissed, the stayapplication and all other pending application/s, if any, also standsdismissed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J ARTI SHARMA /25

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ Get help with an income-tax notice → 💬 Ask our CA

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.