Manisha Bhandari v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle
High Court
28 Nov 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Manisha Bhandari v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle
Date of order
28 Nov 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Manisha Bhandari v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.
Decision: 2.Accordingly, the petition is disposed of as having rendered infructuous.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15459/2022
Manisha Bhandari, Aged About 51 Years, Wife Of Shri SurendraKumar Bhandari, Resident Of C-58, Bajaj Nagar, Tonk Road,Jaipur - 302015
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-6, JaipurHaving Its Address At New Central Revenue Building,Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur - 302005Having Its Address At New Central Revenue Building,Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur - 302005
2. Central Board Of Direct Taxes, Department Of Revenue,Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India, Having ItsAddress At North Block, New Delhi, Through Its ChairmanMinistry Of Finance, Government Of India, Having ItsAddress At North Block, New Delhi, Through Its Chairman
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohan Chatter on behalf of Mr. Siddharth RankaMr. Siddharth Ranka
For Respondent(s): Mr. Anuroop SinghiMr. Sandeep PathakMr. Sandeep Pathak
Mr. CS Sinha on behalf of Mr. RD Rastogi, ASGMr. RD Rastogi, ASG
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS
Order
28/11/2024
1.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view ofsubsequent events, the instant petition has now renderedinfructuous.
2.Accordingly, the petition is disposed of as having rendered
infructuous.
(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ
KAMLESH KUMAR-RAHUL/142
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.