Case Law β€Ί High Court β€Ί The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Ran...

The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Range – 1, Jodhpur v. Marudhar Hotels P. Ltd., Umaid Bhawan Palace, Jodhpur(Rajasthan

High Court 13 May 2019 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court Β· rhcjodh240618
Parties
The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Range – 1, Jodhpur v. Marudhar Hotels P. Ltd., Umaid Bhawan Palace, Jodhpur(Rajasthan
Date of order
13 May 2019
Assessment year(s)
β€”
Outcome
Dismissed

The order β€” as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Range – 1, Jodhpur v. Marudhar Hotels P. Ltd., Umaid Bhawan Palace, Jodhpur(Rajasthan, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous.

Summary auto-generated from the order below β€” read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN ATJODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12874/2015 The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax Range – 1, Jodhpur ----Petitioner Versus 1. Marudhar Hotels P. Ltd., Umaid Bhawan Palace, Jodhpur(Rajasthan) 2. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.K. BissaFor Respondent(s): Mr. Tarun Dudhiya HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA 13/05/2019 Order The instant writ petition is filed by Income Tax Departmentto challenge interim order, passed by Income Tax AppellateTribunal (ITAT). It is stated at Bar by learned counsel for the department thatnow ITAT has finally decided the appeal. In view of the subsequent developments and final decision ofthe appeal itself, the instant writ petition has gone infructuous. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. 7-T.Singh/- (P.K. LOHRA),J
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
βœ… File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) β†’ πŸ’¬ 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 β€” 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.
Contact Careers Media / Press Β· Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
Β© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP Β· LLPIN ACN-4920 Β· Jaipur, Rajasthan