State of Bihar and Ors. v. Ramesh Prasad Verma (Dead)

5 SCC 665Reported decision2009#21108 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 139 Section 142 Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 246A Section 260A

Judgments citing State of Bihar and Ors. v. Ramesh Prasad Verma (Dead)

SUNIL KUMAR,ALWAR RAJASTHAN vs. ITO WARD 3, REWARI

In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s)

ITA 7634/DEL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 7634/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2019-20 Sunil Kumar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Hill View Apartment, K-001, Ward-3, Neemrana, Behror, Alwar, Rewari, Rajasthan-301707 Haryana-123401 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ccmpk7200C Assessee By: None Revenue By : Sh. Amit Shukla, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.12.2025 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2019-20 Arises Against The Addl./Jcit(A), Panaji’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025-26/1081206915(1) Dated 26.09.2025, In Proceedings U/S 143(1) R.W.S. 264 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Shukla, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 246ASection 260ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…arificatory judgment of the Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd (supra) would have the retrospective effect as held in the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in the matters of State of Bihar and Ors v. Ramesh Prasad Verma (Dead) through LR (2017) 5 SCC 665, PV George and Ors v. State of Kerala and Ors (2007) 3 SCC 537 and also Central Bureau of Investigation v. R.R. Kishore (2023) 15 SCC 339. He finally submits that the judgments upon which learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance are clearly distinguishable to the facts of the present case, therefore, they are of no help to the appellan…

RAJENDRA KUMAR TRIPATHI,DELHI vs. AO, DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s)

ITA 3225/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 3225/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 Rajendra Kumar Tripathi, Vs Cit(A)/Nfac 341, Heritage Tower, Plot No. 1, Income Tax Officer, Sector-3, Dwarka, Ward-56(3), New Delhi-110078 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abppt7714C Assessee By: Sh. Rajendra Kumar Tripathi Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.07.2025 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2021-22 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1074785307(1) Dated 20.03.2025, In Proceedings U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Kumar TripathiFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 246ASection 260ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No. 3225/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 Rajendra Kumar Tripathi, Vs CIT(A)/NFAC 341, Heritage Tower, Plot No. 1, Income Tax Officer, Sector-3, Dwarka, Ward-56(3), New Delhi-110078 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABPPT7714C Assessee by: Sh. Rajendra Kumar Tripathi Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2021-22 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. IT…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. SAJJADBHAI NURUDDIN NANDARBARWAL

ITAT/129/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: :

…o a particular person that either prohibits him from doing or continuing to do a particular act (prohibitory injunction); or orders him to carry out a certain act (mandatory injunction). (See. Food Corporation of India v. Sukh Deo Prasad reported at (2009) 5 SCC 665: AIR 2009 SC 2330). 31. According to Wade & Forsyth: Administrative Law (2009), injunction is the standard remedy of private law for forbidding the commission of some unlawful act, e.g. a tort or breach of contract. Its sanction is imprisonment or fine for contempt of court, or attachment of property. Historically, it is an equitable remedy,…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5, KOLKATA vs. SUMAN KUMAR

ITAT/128/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: :