Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner v. Union Of India
High Court
26 Feb 2020 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · rhcjodh240618
Parties
Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner v. Union Of India
Date of order
26 Feb 2020
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner v. Union Of India, the High Court (2020) decided the matter.
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 ATJODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2642/2020
Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner, Through The SecretaryMakhanlal Acharya Age 55 Years.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry OfFinance, Department Of Income Tax, Government OfIndia, New Delhi.Finance, Department Of Income Tax, Government OfIndia, New Delhi.
2. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), KailashHeights, 3Rd Floor, Lal Kothi, Jaipur (Raj.)Heights, 3Rd Floor, Lal Kothi, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption),Exemption Circle, Aayakar Bhawan, Paota C Road,Jodhpur-342010 (Raj.)Exemption Circle, Aayakar Bhawan, Paota C Road,Jodhpur-342010 (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajeev Purohit. For Respondent(s): Mr. Hargovind Chanda forMr. K.K. Bissa.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALIOrder
26/02/2020
This writ petition though has been filed by the petitioneraggrieved against the communication dated 31.1.2020 (Annex.7)passed by respondent No.3 on the application of stay duringpendency of the appeal and the consequential notice dated3.2.2020 (Annex.8) issued under Section 226(3) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitionerpursuant to the direction issued by the Commissioner of IncomeTax has deposited 20% of the demand and that the appeal filed bythe petitioner is pending.
Though submissions have been made that the demand raisedis contrary to the Division Bench judgment in Commissioner ofIncome-tax-I, Jodhpur v. Jodhpur Development Authority: (2017)79 Taxmann 361(Raj.), it is now prayed that the appellateauthority be directed to decide the appeal pending before itexpeditiously.
Learned counsel appearing on caveat has no objection to thesaid prayed made by learned counsel for the petitioner forexpeditious disposal of the appeal.
In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case,the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction tothe appellate authority to decide the appeal as expeditiously aspossible preferably by 30[th] April, 2020.
240-Sumit/-
(ARUN BHANSALI),J
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.