Mr. Pradeep Garg v. Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax
High Court
11 Mar 2025 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Mr. Pradeep Garg v. Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
11 Mar 2025
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Mr. Pradeep Garg v. Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2025) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed asrendered infructuous.
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
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6712/2019
Mr. Pradeep Garg, S/o Shri Ram Lal Garg, Aged About 53 Years,R/o 81B, Vinayakam, Lohagal Road, Ajmer, Former Director OfM/s Raj Autowheels (P) Ltd.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, 6, New FatehpuraSahelia Marg, Udaipur.Sahelia Marg, Udaipur.
2. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central RevenueBuilding, Jaipur Road, Ajmer.Building, Jaipur Road, Ajmer.
3. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-I, OppositeCentral Bus Stand, Jaipur Bench, Ajmer.Central Bus Stand, Jaipur Bench, Ajmer.
4. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range I, OppositeCentral Bus Stand, Jaipur Bench, Ajmer.Central Bus Stand, Jaipur Bench, Ajmer.
5. Tax Recovery Officer, Opposite Central Bus Stand, JaipurBench, Ajmer.Bench, Ajmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Dilip SharmaFor Respondent(s): Mr. Shantanu Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMAOrder
11/03/2025
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of thesubsequent developments during pendency of the writ petition, nocause of action survives for pursuing the petition.
In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed asrendered infructuous.
(MANEESH SHARMA),J
(AVNEESH JHINGAN),J
ANAND TANWAR /34
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.
EaseValue