A' Smt. Uma 33. Mandal v. Income Tax Officer. Ward 5(4). Jaipur 34

90 Taxmann 553Supreme Court of India1997#21586 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 115JB(2)(i)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144

Issues it is cited on

kelvinator mere change of opinion borrowed satisfaction change of opinion tangible material escapement of income regular assessment reason to believe reopening of assessment income-tax officer notice under section 148 reassessment proceedings

Judgments citing A' Smt. Uma 33. Mandal v. Income Tax Officer. Ward 5(4). Jaipur 34

Kailash Chand, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward, Behror

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 565/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Dinesh Badgujar, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 234A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 565/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 cuke Kailash Chand ITO, Vs. Village Patharedi, Tehsil- Ward-Behror Kotputli, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AHDPC7760R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. & Sh. Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj…

Tijaria Polypipes Limited, Jaipur vs. DCIT Cirlce 4, Jaipur

ITA 616/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुरन्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR श्रीराठौड़ कमलेशजयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य एव श्रीनरेन्द्रकुमार, न्यायिकसदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No. 616/JPR/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2013-14 TijariaPolypipes Ltd. SP-1-2316, Ramchandrapura, RIICO Vs. The DCIT Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur- 302 022 Circle-4 Jaipur स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCT 4796 M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व क…

Ashok Sharma, Kota vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2 - Kota, Kota

ITA 359/JPR/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Nov 2024AY 2014-2015

For Appellant: Shri Priyank Kabra (C.A.) (V.C.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठौड़ कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 359/JPR/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2014-15 Sh. Ashok Sharma 74, Gulab Bagh, Canal to Police Line Road, Kota. बनाम The DCIT Vs. Circle-2, Kota. स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AOXPS2855Q अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Priyank Kabra (C.A.) (V.C.) राजस्व की ओरसे…

Paris Elysees India Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-7, Jaipur

ITA 681/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Him Against The Order Dated 05.12.2019 Passed Under Section 147/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, [ For Short “Act” ] By Acit, Circle-07, Jaipur.

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 253(5)

…Limited ITA No. 566/JP/2018 followed the aforementioned decisions. 17. The submissions mentioned above were made before the ld. CIT (A), but they were completely ignored. The ld. CIT (A) relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Associated Stone Industries, 90 Taxmann 553. However, the ld. CIT (A) misinterpreted the judgment. The Supreme Court in the Associated Stone Industries case explicitly stated that reopening of assessments cannot be done if all material details were fully and truly disclosed by the assessee. The judgment is actually in favor of the assessee, as it emphasizes that there must be new tangib…