Shyo Ram (Ay 2013-14) v. Income Tax Officer, Ward Behror, Income Tax Building,Riico Industrial Area, Behror, Rajasthan
High Court
09 Jul 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Shyo Ram (Ay 2013-14) v. Income Tax Officer, Ward Behror, Income Tax Building,Riico Industrial Area, Behror, Rajasthan
Date of order
09 Jul 2024
Assessment year(s)
2013-14
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Shyo Ram (Ay 2013-14) v. Income Tax Officer, Ward Behror, Income Tax Building,Riico Industrial Area, Behror, Rajasthan, the High Court (2024) decided the matter under Section 271 of the Income-tax Act.
Decision: 3.The petition is disposed of as not pressed with liberty asprayed for.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9446/2024
Shyo Ram (Ay 2013-14) S/o Shri Natha Ram, Aged About 93Years, R/o G-1/181(D), Riico Industrial Area, Phase - 1, Behror,Alwar, Rajasthan - 301701.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Income Tax Officer, Ward Behror, Income Tax Building,Riico Industrial Area, Behror, Rajasthan - 301701.Riico Industrial Area, Behror, Rajasthan - 301701.
2. National Faceless Assessment Centre (Nfac), Through TheAssessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Ministry OfFinance, Inside Jawahar Lal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi -110003.Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Ministry OfFinance, Inside Jawahar Lal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi -110003.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)For Respondent(s)
: Mr. Vedant Agrawal: Mr. Anuroop SinghiMr. N.S. BhatiMr. Aditya Khandelwal: Mr. Anuroop SinghiMr. N.S. BhatiMr. Aditya Khandelwal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
Order
09/07/2024
1.The challenge in the present petition is to penalty imposedunder Section 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2.Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing at somelength realizing that quantum of appeal is already pending beforethe Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), is not pressing thepetition with liberty to avail remedy of the appeal. However, arequest is made that the petitioner is super senior citizen, theAppellate Authority be directed to decide the quantum as well aspenalty appeal in a time bound manner.
3.The petition is disposed of as not pressed with liberty asprayed for.
4.There is no doubt in the eventuality of request being made tothe Chief Commissioner of Income Tax with regard to earlydisposal of the quantum and the penalty appeals, the same shallbe considered sympathetically taking into consideration the age ofthe petitioner.
(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J(AVNEESH JHINGAN),J
Riya/SK/01
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.