High Court of Gujarat

SANDESH PROCON LLPversusASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(3), AHMEDABAD

Disposal: 53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE
Bench: A S SUPEHIAVAIBHAVI D NANAVATI

Holding

The court did not dispose of the petition and ordered it to be re‑heard, releasing the matter for future notification before the appropriate bench.

Summary

Sandesh Procon LLP filed a special civil writ application before the Gujarat High Court challenging an order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(3), Ahmedabad. The petition was heard before a two‑judge bench, but the judges were unable to deliver a judgment due to paucity of time. Consequently, the court ordered that the matter be released and re‑heard at a later date. The order directs that the case be notified before the appropriate bench when it is taken up again. No substantive merits of the petition were decided.

Issues considered

Whether the writ petition can be disposed of despite the court’s inability to deliver a judgment on the day of hearing

Subjects

writ applicationincome taxprocedural delayre‑hearinghigh court order

Judgment

        C/SCA/12829/2021                          ORDER DATED: 28/03/2022



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12829 of 2021
================================================================
                       SANDESH PROCON LLP
                              Versus
          ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(3),
                            AHMEDABAD
================================================================
Appearance:
MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
M R BHATT & CO.(5953) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
        and
        HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE

                           Date : 28/03/2022
                            ORAL ORDER
           (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE)


     This writ application was heard finally. However, on
account of paucity of time, the judgment could not be
delivered.

     With passage of time, the matter may have to be
once again re-heard.

          In such circumstances, the matter is released.

    Let the matter be notified before the appropriate
Bench taking up the subject matter.


                                                    (J. B. PARDIWALA, J)




                                                 (NISHA M. THAKORE,J)
Manoj




                                  Page 1 of 1

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "writ application"Sign in to search