Vinita Devi Golecha v. Union Of India
High Court
04 Nov 2022 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · rhcjodh240618
Parties
Vinita Devi Golecha v. Union Of India
Date of order
04 Nov 2022
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Vinita Devi Golecha v. Union Of India, the High Court (2022) decided the matter.
Decision: The writ petition is hence disposed of as infructuous.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN ATJODHPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12868/2018
Vinita Devi Golecha W/o Rajkumar Golecha, Aged About 37Years, Gundochiyo Ka Baas , Pali Marwar.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Principal Commissioner OfIncome Tax, (Central), Central Revenue Statue Circle,Jaipur.Income Tax, (Central), Central Revenue Statue Circle,Jaipur.
2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Department, CentralCircle-2 Jodhpur.Circle-2 Jodhpur.
3. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) Central, Udaipur.4. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central ,circle-2Jodhpur.4. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central ,circle-2Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Bhandawat.Mr. Shreyansh Bhandawat.Mr. Shreyansh Bhandawat.For Respondent(s): Mr. G.S. Chouhan
Mr. Shreyansh Bhandawat.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUROrder
04/11/2022
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to assail thenotices dated 16.08.2018 (Annex.-4) and 21.06.2018 (Annex.-2)whereby, penalty was imposed upon them. Shri Chouhan hasplaced on record copy of order passed by Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeal) Central Udaipur whereby, the penalty imposed on thepetitioner has been quashed. Apparently, thus, the notices havebecome otiose by virtue of the aforesaid development.
The writ petition is hence disposed of as infructuous.
Stay application also stands disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
35-Prashant/-
(SANDEEP MEHTA),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.