##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:43496-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15059/2022 CNR: RJHC010692652022 | URN: CW / 30194U / 2022 Sri Shyam Jeweller, G-3, Heeralal Mall, Opposite Railway Station, Bikaner, Through The Partner Sunil Sipani, S/o Chatur Bhuj Sipani, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Behind Baba Ramdev Tent House, Rani Bazar, Bikaner.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance, New Delhi.

2. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, Aayakar Bhawan, Rani Bazar, Bikaner.

3. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Income Tax Department, DCIT / ACIT CEN CIR, Aayakar Bhawan, Rani Bazar, Bikaner.

4. Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward I(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Rani Bazar, Bikaner.

----Respondents Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15563/2022 CNR: RJHC010692612022 | URN: CW / 31071U / 2022 Sri Shyam Jeweller, G-3, Heeralal Mall, Opposite Railway Station, Bikaner, Through The Partner Sunil Sipani, S/o Chatur Bhuj Sipani, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Behind Baba Ramdev Tent House, Rani Bazar, Bikaner.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance, New Delhi.

2. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, Aayakar Bhawan, Rani Bazar, Bikaner.

3. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Income Tax Department, DCIT / ACIT CEN CIR, Aayakar Bhawan, Rani Bazar, Bikaner.

4. Income Tax Officer, ITO Ward I(1), Aaykar Bhawan, Rani Bazar, Bikaner.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Purohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY K. AGRAWAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

Order

10/09/2026

1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that these writ petitions are directed against the impugned order dated 30.09.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, DCIT / ACIT CEN CIR, Bikaner, questioning the interim order by which the application for grant of interim relief was rejected.

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the present writ petitions have been preferred against the interim order wherein substantive appeals have been decided vide orders dated 13.08.2026 respectively, as such, the remedy to the petitioner is to question the order dated 30.09.2022 before the Appellate Authority. Since these writ petitions have been preferred against the interim order while substantive appeals remain pending before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Appeal and, as such, since the appeals have been decided by the learned CIT, Appeal, the present writ petitions questioning the interim order have become infructuous. The remedy to the petitioner is to question the final order dated 30.09.2022 in accordance with law.

3. The said orders dated 13.08.2026 passed in the substantive appeals have been submitted at the time or arguments and the same are taken on record.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks time.

5. This Court finds that as the present writ petitions are directed against the rejection order dated 30.09.2022 whereas the substantive appeals were directed against the assessment order and the said substantive appeals have been decided vide orders dated 13.08.2026 respectively, therefore, the present writ petitions preferred against the rejection order do not require any interference.

6. With the aforesaid observation, the present writ petitions are disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to question the order passed by the Appellate Authority, before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

7. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J (SANJAY K. AGRAWAL),CJ

19-20/PoonamS/BhumikaP