What is Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel v. State of Gujarat & Anr. authority for?

Proceedings initiated illegally and without jurisdiction are nullities, as a jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter. Such defects are not curable.

How many judgments cite Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel v. State of Gujarat & Anr.?

14 judgments on BharatTax cite Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel v. State of Gujarat & Anr. (6 SCC 789), spanning 2020 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel v. State of Gujarat & Anr. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 250.

Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel v. State of Gujarat & Anr. (6 SCC 789)

Mahesh Chand, Bilaspur vs. ITO Ward-5(2)(2), Gautam Budh Nagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 375/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] Mahesh Chand, Vs Ito, 5, Mohalla Alamkhani, Ward-5(2)(2), Greater Noida, Bilaspur, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh-201131. Uttar Pradesh. Pan-Akcpc3238J Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.07.2025 Order

Section 143(3)Section 250

…Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition vs Mst . Katiji & Ors. 167 ITR 471 (SC); Ram Nath Sao @ Ram Nath Sahu and Others vs Gobardhan Sao And Others AIR 2002 SUPREME COURT 1201; and Improvement Trust vs Ujagar Singh reported in 2010 6 SCC 789. The application is further supported by an affidavit wherein the facts narrated in condondation petition are re-affirmed by assessee. Accordingly, the prayer is made for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 4. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR vehemently objected for the mission of the appeal. 5. After considering the facts and the petition of…

ITO Ward - 2(5), Noida vs. Vidya Sagar Tyagi, New Delhi

In the result, the captioned appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1184/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2009-10 Ito Vidhyasagar Tyagi Ward- 2 (5) Vs K-1/25, Lgf, Noida Chitranjan Park, New Delhi Pan No.Acopt7099J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 268ASection 268A(1)

…Nigam Ltd. v. Indure (P) Ltd., Slate of Gujarat v. Rajesh Kumar Chimanlal Barot, Kesar Singh v. Sadhu, Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Supan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.] 11. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel & Anrs (2008) 6 SCC 789 held that jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter and the entire proceedings having been initiated illegally and without jurisdiction, and thus are nullities. 12. In view of what has been discussed above and following the decisions rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Fatima Bibi (supra), United Commercial Bank (supra) and Kanwa…

ITO, Ward-1(4), Ghaziabad vs. Manju Gupta, Ghaziabad

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6821/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2015-16 Ito Rakesh Gupta( Huf) Ward -2 (2) Vs Iii-J-58, Nehru Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad U.P. 201001 Pan No. Aaohr9383R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Acit Mudit Kumar House No.31, Circle – 1, Ghaziabad Vs Patel Nagar-Iii, Ghaziabad Pan No.Agfpk3998N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ito Manju Gupta, Ward -1 (4) Vs J-58, Nehru Nagar-Iii, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad U.P 201001 Pan No. Baqpg4864B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 68Section 69C

…Nigam Ltd. v. Indure (P) Ltd., Slate of Gujarat v. Rajesh Kumar Chimanlal Barot, Kesar Singh v. Sadhu, Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Supan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.] 11. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel & Anrs (2008) 6 SCC 789 held that jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter and the entire proceedings having been initiated illegally and without jurisdiction, and thus are nullities. In view of what has been discussed above and following the 12. decisions rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Fatima Bibi (supra), United Commercial Bank (supra) and Kanwa…

ACIT, Circle-1, Ghaziabad vs. Mudit Kumar, Ghaziabad

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6820/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2015-16 Ito Rakesh Gupta( Huf) Ward -2 (2) Vs Iii-J-58, Nehru Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad U.P. 201001 Pan No. Aaohr9383R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Acit Mudit Kumar House No.31, Circle – 1, Ghaziabad Vs Patel Nagar-Iii, Ghaziabad Pan No.Agfpk3998N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ito Manju Gupta, Ward -1 (4) Vs J-58, Nehru Nagar-Iii, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad U.P 201001 Pan No. Baqpg4864B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 68Section 69C

…Nigam Ltd. v. Indure (P) Ltd., Slate of Gujarat v. Rajesh Kumar Chimanlal Barot, Kesar Singh v. Sadhu, Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Supan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.] 11. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel & Anrs (2008) 6 SCC 789 held that jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter and the entire proceedings having been initiated illegally and without jurisdiction, and thus are nullities. In view of what has been discussed above and following the 12. decisions rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Fatima Bibi (supra), United Commercial Bank (supra) and Kanwa…

ITO Ward - 2(2), Ghaziabad vs. Rakesh Gupta (HUF), Ghaziabad

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6814/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2015-16 Ito Rakesh Gupta( Huf) Ward -2 (2) Vs Iii-J-58, Nehru Nagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad U.P. 201001 Pan No. Aaohr9383R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Acit Mudit Kumar House No.31, Circle – 1, Ghaziabad Vs Patel Nagar-Iii, Ghaziabad Pan No.Agfpk3998N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ito Manju Gupta, Ward -1 (4) Vs J-58, Nehru Nagar-Iii, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad U.P 201001 Pan No. Baqpg4864B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 68Section 69C

…Nigam Ltd. v. Indure (P) Ltd., Slate of Gujarat v. Rajesh Kumar Chimanlal Barot, Kesar Singh v. Sadhu, Kondiba Dagadu Kadam v. Savitribai Supan Gujar and CCE v. Flock (India) (P) Ltd.] 11. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel & Anrs (2008) 6 SCC 789 held that jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter and the entire proceedings having been initiated illegally and without jurisdiction, and thus are nullities. In view of what has been discussed above and following the 12. decisions rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Fatima Bibi (supra), United Commercial Bank (supra) and Kanwa…

ITO Ward - 3(4), Noida vs. Shobha Agnihotri, Noida

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1193/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Memebr D-4, Sec-27, Noida – 201 301 Noida-201 301 Pan No. Aewpa 0847 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By -None- Revenue By Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 02.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.03.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28.12.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Noida Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under:

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 68

…the very root of the jurisdiction, and where it is lacking, it is a case of inherent lack of jurisdiction. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Fatma Bibi Ahmed Patel v. State of Gujarat & Anr., (2008) 6 SCC 789, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that: - “21. This Court, in a matter like the present one where the jurisdictional issue goes to the root of the matter, would not allow injustice to be done to a party. The entire proceedings having been initiated illegally and without jurisdiction, all actions taken by the court were without jurisdictio…