S.b. Civil Writs v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1 , Ajmer,Rajasthan
High Court
30 Jul 2018 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
S.b. Civil Writs v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1 , Ajmer,Rajasthan
Date of order
30 Jul 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In S.b. Civil Writs v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1 , Ajmer,Rajasthan, the High Court (2018) dismissed 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.
The order — as passed by the High Court
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writs No. 13092/2018
Anupam Marbles Pvt. Ltd., Having Its Office At E-201, RiicoIndustrial Area, Madanganj-Kishangarh , through its Director andAuthorized Signatory, Akash Bohra S/o Shri Ashok Kumar Bohra,aged about 28 years, Resident Of House No. 26, LecturersColony, City Road, Madanganj-Kishangarh, District Ajmer.
----Petitioner
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1 , Ajmer,Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anant Kasliwal, Adv. For Respondent(s):
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Order
30/07/2018
1.The writ petition challenges the order whereby theapplication for rectification has been rejected by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, Jaipur Benches, Jaipur (for short ‘ITAT’). Theoriginal order passed by the ITAT on 06.09.2017 is already asubject matter of challenge under appeal preferred before theDivision Bench.
2.Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that onaccount of rectification application moved the appeal was delayedand, therefore, the present writ petition has been filed challengingthe order of rectification.
3.Taking note of the fact that rectification has beendisallowed, the factum of rejection of rectification application has
to be examined by the appellate Court i.e. Division Bench whilehearing the appeal against the original order and a separate writpetition would not lie independently to examine the decision ofrejection of rectification application. However, if a different view istaken by the Division Bench, the petitioner would always be freeto take up the matter again before this Court.
4.With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition isdismissed at this stage.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J
N.Gandhi/79
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.