Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10114 (RAJ)

HARDEEP SINGH RANDHAWA v. D.C.I.T.

ITA/321/2018 · 2026-07-09

Arun Monga, Maneesh Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:25841-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 321/2018 URN: ITA / 493U / 2018 Hardeep Singh Randhawa, Proprieter M/s. Rajdhani Gas Service, 236, Mehta Marg Corner, Galta Road, Suraj Pole Bazar, Jaipur (Rajasthan). ----Appellant Versus D.c.i.t., Circle-5, N.c.r. Building, C-Scheme, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Mohan Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Jaya Pathak, Adv. for Mr. Sandeep Pathak, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Meena, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 09/07/2026 1. Under challenge herein is an order dated 20.07.2018 passed by Ld. ITAT, Jaipur vide which appeal filed by the appellant against order dated 25.03.2015 passed by Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed. 2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has no instructions from his client as all his attempts to contact him have been an exercise in futility. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent also submits that the questions of law framed by this Court have already been answered in favour of revenue in a similar matter which was pending before the Kerala High Court vide the judgment dated 08.04.2026 rendered in W.P.(C.) No. 14218/2026 and in view thereof, the instant appeal deserves to be dismissed even on merits. [2026:RJ-JP:25841-DB] (2 of 2) [ITA-321/2018] 3. Be that as it may, given that learned counsel for the appellant pleads no instructions, we are dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution, and the questions which were framed while admitting the appeal are left open to be decided in appropriate proceedings, should an occasion arise in future. (MANEESH SHARMA),J (ARUN MONGA),J 73/ASHWANI-PARSHANT