(2000) 6 SCC 735, R.V.E.Venkatachala Gounder v. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami and V.P. Temple

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -6 vs. M.B. Finmart Pvt. Ltd

Appeal is allowed

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

…waived in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of R.V.E. RFA No.836/2016 Page 6 of 7 Venkatachala Gounder v. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple & Anr., (2003) 8 SCC 752. Also, the counsel for the appellant/plaintiff is justified in arguing that the trial court has wrongly held that the appellant/plaintiff failed to prove all the invoices inasmuch as in para 5 of the counter-claim filed by the respondent no.1/defendant no.1, it is clearly admitted that the appellant/plaintiff had in fact raised the total bill…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I vs. Shri Suresh Nanda

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…ues and the investigating officer PW-54 who has exhibited major portion of the documents relating to banks in the form of statement of accounts and pay-in-slips etc. 5.2. Learned counsel for the CBI referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in (2003) 8 SCC 752 R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder Vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple & Anr. contends that an objection as to the admissibility of the evidence or mode of proof thereof can be taken when it is tendered and not subsequently. The documents having been tendered in evidence and no objection having been taken, now in the present appeals the appell…

Daikin Airconditioning India Pvt Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…ues and the investigating officer PW-54 who has exhibited major portion of the documents relating to banks in the form of statement of accounts and pay-in-slips etc. 5.2. Learned counsel for the CBI referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in (2003) 8 SCC 752 R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder Vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple & Anr. contends that an objection as to the admissibility of the evidence or mode of proof thereof can be taken when it is tendered and not subsequently. The documents having been tendered in evidence and no objection having been taken, now in the present appeals the appell…

Commissioner of Income Tax -XI vs. Amit Malhotra

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…ues and the investigating officer PW-54 who has exhibited major portion of the documents relating to banks in the form of statement of accounts and pay-in-slips etc. 5.2. Learned counsel for the CBI referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in (2003) 8 SCC 752 R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder Vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple & Anr. contends that an objection as to the admissibility of the evidence or mode of proof thereof can be taken when it is tendered and not subsequently. The documents having been tendered in evidence and no objection having been taken, now in the present appeals the appell…

Pr. CIT Central-1 vs. Amrapali Grand

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…ues and the investigating officer PW-54 who has exhibited major portion of the documents relating to banks in the form of statement of accounts and pay-in-slips etc. 5.2. Learned counsel for the CBI referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in (2003) 8 SCC 752 R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder Vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple & Anr. contends that an objection as to the admissibility of the evidence or mode of proof thereof can be taken when it is tendered and not subsequently. The documents having been tendered in evidence and no objection having been taken, now in the present appeals the appell…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…ues and the investigating officer PW-54 who has exhibited major portion of the documents relating to banks in the form of statement of accounts and pay-in-slips etc. 5.2. Learned counsel for the CBI referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in (2003) 8 SCC 752 R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder Vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple & Anr. contends that an objection as to the admissibility of the evidence or mode of proof thereof can be taken when it is tendered and not subsequently. The documents having been tendered in evidence and no objection having been taken, now in the present appeals the appell…

Commissioner Ofincome Tax(Central)-II vs. Spn Milk Products Industries Pvt. Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…ues and the investigating officer PW-54 who has exhibited major portion of the documents relating to banks in the form of statement of accounts and pay-in-slips etc. 5.2. Learned counsel for the CBI referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in (2003) 8 SCC 752 R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder Vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple & Anr. contends that an objection as to the admissibility of the evidence or mode of proof thereof can be taken when it is tendered and not subsequently. The documents having been tendered in evidence and no objection having been taken, now in the present appeals the appell…

Commissioner of Income Tax-(Central)-I vs. Siddharath Sareen

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…ues and the investigating officer PW-54 who has exhibited major portion of the documents relating to banks in the form of statement of accounts and pay-in-slips etc. 5.2. Learned counsel for the CBI referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in (2003) 8 SCC 752 R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder Vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple & Anr. contends that an objection as to the admissibility of the evidence or mode of proof thereof can be taken when it is tendered and not subsequently. The documents having been tendered in evidence and no objection having been taken, now in the present appeals the appell…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Jubliant Oil & Gas Pvt.Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…ues and the investigating officer PW-54 who has exhibited major portion of the documents relating to banks in the form of statement of accounts and pay-in-slips etc. 5.2. Learned counsel for the CBI referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in (2003) 8 SCC 752 R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder Vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P. Temple & Anr. contends that an objection as to the admissibility of the evidence or mode of proof thereof can be taken when it is tendered and not subsequently. The documents having been tendered in evidence and no objection having been taken, now in the present appeals the appell…

CIT vs. J. H. Finvest Pvt. Ltd

Bench: The Trial Court) Under Section 96 Of The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“Cpc”) Against The Judgment & Decree Dated 10Th September, 2014, Passed By The Additional District Judge-17 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi In Suit Bearing Cs No. 398/2014, Titled As Sunil Kumar Jain & Anr. Versus Ram Kishan Tokas & Anr. (“Impugned Judgment”). 2. The Appellants Had Filed Cs No. 398/2014 Seeking A Decree Towards Recovery Of Firstly, Possession Of The Corner Shop Measuring 15 X 9 Sq. Ft., Situated In Property Bearing No. E-108/2, Opposite Community Centre, Bgn Market, Munirka Village, New Delhi (“Suit Shop”) & Secondly, Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards Damages & Compensation For The Period From 01St July, Digitally Signed By:Hariom Sharma Signing Date:15.12.2025 20:56:25 Signature Not Verified

…on v. State of Madras [AIR 1966 SC 1457] in support of his submission that a document not admissible in evidence, though brought on record, has to be excluded from consideration. We 10 (1984) 1 SCC 369. 11 (2003) 8 SCC 752. Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:15.12.2025 20:56:25 Signature Not Verified RFA 30/2015 Page 40 of 43 do not have any dispute with the proposition of law…