Shri Suchet Singh Yadav v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Behror
High Court
04 Dec 2017 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Shri Suchet Singh Yadav v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Behror
Date of order
04 Dec 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Shri Suchet Singh Yadav v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Behror, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
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 ATJAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3513 / 2015
Shri Suchet Singh Yadav S/o Shri Sultan Singh, Aged About 67Years, Near Police Station,mohalla- Manpura, Tehsil- Behror.
----Petitioner
Versus
The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Behror
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3512 / 2015 Shri Suchet Singh Yadav S/o Shri Sultan Singh aged 67 years, Near Police Station, Mohalla-Manpura, Tehsil-Behror
----Petitioner
Versus
Income Tax Officer,
Ward - Behror
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Gargieya
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Parinitoo Jain
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARIJudgment
04/12/2017
It is stated that these writ petitions have becomeinfructuous in view of the fact that subsequent to the notice underSection 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessment orderhas already been passed. The petitioner has preferred an appealand the CIT (appeals) has also decided it and presently matter ispending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
In view of the above, these writ petitions are dismissedas rendered infructuous. However, the petitioner would be atliberty to pursue the pending appeal before the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal.
A copy of this order be placed in connected file.
(M.N. BHANDARI)J.
Sunita/176-177
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.