Which sections of the Income Tax Act does 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11(5), Section 13(1)(c), Section 131, Section 132, Section 132(4), Section 153A.

31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri

Q: How many judgments cite 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri?

26 judgments on BharatTax cite 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri (26 ITR 1), spanning 2018 to 2024.

26 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1954#4493 most cited

What is 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri authority for?

Assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings. The assessee has a right to inspect the record and all relevant documents before being called upon to lead evidence in rebuttal.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Suraj Mall Mohta · assessment proceedings · judicial proceedings · right to inspect record · natural justice · fair hearing · Income Tax Act · rebuttal evidence

Sections most often in play

Section 11(5)Section 13(1)(c)Section 131 Section 132 Section 132(4)Section 153A Section 153C Section 164(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 23(3)price rigging bogus ltcg bogus long term capital gain preponderance of probability circular trading penny stock revision u/s 263 section 10(38)section 234d section 34 violation of natural justice

Judgments citing 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri

ZULA MERCHANDISC PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(1), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 553/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 68

…it by him, and lastly, it declined to take all the material that the assessee wanted to produce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing.” 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income- 8 I.T.A. No.553/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Zulu Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect the rec…

MEGAPODE VYAPAAR PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 99/KOL/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rites Goel, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…it by him, and lastly, it declined to take all the material that the assessee wanted to produce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing. 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all ITA Nos. 99 & 100/Kol/2023 Megapode Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd; A.Ys. 13-14 & 14-15 the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect the record an…

MEGAPODE VYAPAAR PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 100/KOL/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rites Goel, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

GILT COMMODITIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-3(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1447/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

…ce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing.” Page 11 of 26 I.T.A. No.: 1447/KOL/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Gilt Commodities Pvt. Ltd. 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect the record and all relevant documents before he is called upon to lead evidence in rebu…

LAXMI MEMORIAL EDUCATION TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, MANGALORE

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

ITA 756/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Srinivas Kamath, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 132

…ITA No.756/Bang/2024 Laxmi Memorial Education Trust, Mangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2021-22 Laxmi Memorial Education Trust 15-3-93, A J Towers Balmatta DCIT Vs. Mangalore 575 002 Central Circle, Mangalore PAN NO : AAATL1768N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Srinivas Kamath, A.R. Respondent by : Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R. Date of Hearing : 07.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 18.07.2024 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by assessee…

NAMOKAR BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 762/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am]

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…it by him, and lastly, it declined to take all the material that the assessee wanted to produce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing.” 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect the record and all relevant documents before he is called upon to lead evidence in rebu…

SAMRAT FINVESTORS PRIVATE LIMITED. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD- 10(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 840/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 840/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Samrat Finvestors Private Limited Income Tax Officer, Ward – 10(2), 20/1, Maharshi Debendra Vs Kolkata 2Nd Floor, Room No. 13A Kolkata - 700007 [Pan : Aadcs4698G] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A/R Revenue By : Shri B.K. Singh, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/12/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dt. 27/06/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee In The Instant Appeal Has Raised Two Effective Issues In The Various Grounds Before Us Which Are Summed Up As Under:- (I) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs.3,98,50,208/- As Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Alleged Bogus Loss In Share Trading & In F&O Segment. (Ii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.11,58,944/- As Made By The Assessing

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A/RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. D/R

Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 250

…it by him, and lastly, it declined to take all the material that the assessee wanted to produce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing.” 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any 14 I.T.A. No. 840/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Samrat Finvestors Private Limited conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect t…

NALANDA BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 763/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jan 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 763/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Nalanda Builders Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata 5, Sree Charan Sarani Vs Bally Howrah – 711201 (West Bengal) [Pan : Aabcn7736Q] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A/R Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dt. 23/11/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Issues Raised In Ground Nos. 2 To 4 Is Against The Confirmation Of Addition As Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Difference Between The Value Taken By The Assessee & The Fair Market Value (Fmv) U/S 50C Of The Act. 3. The Facts In Brief Are That During The Year, The Assessee Sold Two Flats For An Aggregate Consideration Of Rs.3,00,00,000/- & Accordingly Addition Of Rs.3,26,37,314/- Was Made To The Income Of The Assessee. In 2

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A/RFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 250Section 50CSection 56(2)(x)

…it by him, and lastly, it declined to take all the material that the assessee wanted to produce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing.” 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect the record and all relevant documents before he is called upon to lead evidence in rebu…

PINKY AGARWAL ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 984/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 250

…it by him, and lastly, it declined to take all the material that the assessee wanted to produce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing.” 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect the record and all relevant Page 38 of 74 I.T.A. Nos.: 982, 983, 984 & 2068/KOL/2018…

M/S. NISHIT AGARWAL BENEFICIARY TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 983/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 250

…it by him, and lastly, it declined to take all the material that the assessee wanted to produce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing.” 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect the record and all relevant Page 38 of 74 I.T.A. Nos.: 982, 983, 984 & 2068/KOL/2018…

M/S. GATEWAY FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 982/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 250

…it by him, and lastly, it declined to take all the material that the assessee wanted to produce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing.” 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect the record and all relevant Page 38 of 74 I.T.A. Nos.: 982, 983, 984 & 2068/KOL/2018…

PRATIK AGARWAL BENEFICIARY TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, C.C.-3(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 2068/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 250

…it by him, and lastly, it declined to take all the material that the assessee wanted to produce in support of its case. The result is that the assessee had not had a fair hearing.” 31. In Suraj Mall Mohta and Co. v. A. V. Visvanatha Sastri reported in (1954) 26 ITR 1 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that “the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer are judicial proceedings and all the incidents of such judicial proceedings have to be observed before any conclusion is arrived at. The assessee has a right to inspect the record and all relevant Page 38 of 74 I.T.A. Nos.: 982, 983, 984 & 2068/KOL/2018…

VARSHA DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 510/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

…e AO has made the addition and it has also held that there is no need for examination/cross examination. While doing so, the Calcutta High Court could not consider the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suraj Mall Mohta & Co. vs. Visvanatha Sastri & Anr. in 26 ITR 1: "When an assessment on escaped or evaded income is made under the provisions of s. 34 of the Indian IT Act, all the provisions for arriving at the assessment provided under s. 23(3) come into operation and the assessment has to be made on all relevant material and on evidence and the assessee ordinarily has the fullest right to inspect the records…

VARSHA DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 509/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

VARSHA DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 508/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

VARSHA DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 507/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

M/S. DEVARAJ URS EDUCATIONAL TRUST FOR BACKWARD CLASSES (REGD),KOLAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 155/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: Na

For Appellant: Sri Ramasubramaniyan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Pradeep Kumar, D.R

Section 11Section 12ASection 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…best evidence in his possession nor the Department. It is settled principle that whenever the assessee desires, he can have access to all information, whether favourable or adverse to him as laid down in Suraj Mall Mohta & Co. v. A.V. Visvanatha Sastri [1954] 26 ITR 1 (SC), SMC Share Brokers Ltd. v. CIT [2008] 22 SOT 7 (Delhi)(URO), CIT v. Simon Carves Ltd. [1976] 105 ITR 212 (SC). In this case the assessee has every reason to believe that the evidences tendered by the parents, who were Departmental witnesses, were all favourable to assessee and therefore, the Department was apprehensive of providing these statem…

M/S ANANTHA REFINERY PVT. LTD. vs. DCIT,

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1554/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep &For Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR

…lowance was pre-meditated and not based on any such report. It is also strange that these reports were used in assessment order without providing the same to the assessee. The Supreme Court in the case of Suraj Mall Mohta & Co. vs. Visvanatha Sastri & Anr. in 26 ITR 1 held as under:- “When an assessment on escaped or evaded income is made under the provisions of s. 34 of the Indian IT Act, all the provisions for arriving at the assessment provided under s. 23(3) come into operation and the assessment has to be made on all relevant material and on evidence and the assessee ordinarily has the fullest right to inspe…

M/S ANANTHA REFINERY PVT. LTD. vs. DCIT,

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1553/BANG/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.R.Pradeep &For Respondent: Dr.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DR

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD vs. ABIR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed in above terms

ITA 2068/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2010-11 Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Abir Infrastructure Pvt. Income-Tax, Ltd., Hyderabad. Central Circle – 1(3), Hyderabad. Pan – Aafc3608N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri H. SrinivasuluFor Respondent: Shri M. Dayasagar

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…6 dated 28-06-1965, copy of the approval in the prescribed pro-forma submitted to Pr. CIT and provide a copy of the order sheet for reopening despite the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suraj Mall Mohta and Company Vs A V Viswanath Sastri 26 ITR 1, Delhi High Court in the case of SASH Infrastructure Ltd Vs CIT 398 ITR 198 and Orissa High Court in the case of Shankarlal Khaitan Vs ACIT WP(C) 4816 of 2017 as AO was very well conscious of his own act of omission and commission that no reopening is possible without perusing the facts in case records, particularly in a case falling under First Pro…

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2