Avinash Gupta Vs. Union of India

Avinash Gupta vs Union of India

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Sep 14, 2015

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1178471

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1178471
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
Decided On: Sep 14, 2015
Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 8771 of 2015 & CM Nos. 19409 of 2015 (for stay) & 19410 of 2015 (For Exemption)
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Avinash Gupta

Respondent

Union of India

Excerpt

1. the petition impugns the decision dated 9th september, 2015 of the government of india refusing to extend the date prescribed of 30th september, 2015 for filing income tax return of entities whose accounts are required to be audited. 2. the petitioners do not disclose any cause of action in their favour. rather, in para 6 of the petition, it is pleaded that the petition is in the nature of public interest. however, the petition is not drafted as a public interest litigation (pil) and does not comply with the rules for filing a petition in public interest. 3. the counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a pil. 4. dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid. no costs.

Full Judgment

1. The petition impugns the decision dated 9th September, 2015 of the Government of India refusing to extend the date prescribed of 30th September, 2015 for filing Income Tax Return of entities whose accounts are required to be audited.

2. The petitioners do not disclose any cause of action in their favour. Rather, in para 6 of the petition, it is pleaded that the petition is in the nature of public interest. However, the petition is not drafted as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and does not comply with the rules for filing a petition in public interest.

3. The counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a PIL.

4. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.

No Costs.

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2015 Same Parties Avinash Gupta vs Union of India Same Subject Education Same Judge Rajiv Sahai Endlaw