89. In Surinder Kumar Khanna v. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

8 SCC 271Reported decision2018#25658 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,627 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2017.

Judgments citing 89. In Surinder Kumar Khanna v. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Appeals are allowed

ITA/931/2017HC Delhi03 Nov 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

For Appellant: Mr Colin Gonsalves, Senior Advocate withFor Respondent: Mr Rajesh Manchanda, SPP with Mr Rajat
Section 23Section 28Section 29

…xpressed by this Court in Kashmira Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh where the decision of the Privy Council in Bhuboni Sahu’s case has been cited with approval.” 89. In Surinder Kumar Khanna v. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence: (2018) 8 SCC 271, the Supreme Court held that “it would be inappropriate to base the conviction of the appellant purely on the statements of co-accused”. CRL. A. Nos. 918/2017 & 931/2017 Page 43 of 57 90. In Mohammed Fasrin v. State: (2019) 8 SCC 811, the Supreme Court after noting that the question whether confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-2 vs. Container Corporation of India Ltd

Appeals are allowed

ITA/918/2017HC Delhi31 Oct 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

For Appellant: Mr Colin Gonsalves, Senior Advocate withFor Respondent: Mr Rajesh Manchanda, SPP with Mr Rajat
Section 23Section 28Section 29

…xpressed by this Court in Kashmira Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh where the decision of the Privy Council in Bhuboni Sahu’s case has been cited with approval.” 89. In Surinder Kumar Khanna v. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence: (2018) 8 SCC 271, the Supreme Court held that “it would be inappropriate to base the conviction of the appellant purely on the statements of co-accused”. CRL. A. Nos. 918/2017 & 931/2017 Page 43 of 57 90. In Mohammed Fasrin v. State: (2019) 8 SCC 811, the Supreme Court after noting that the question whether confessional statements recorded under Section 67 of the…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-2 vs. M/S Bose Corporation (India) Pvt. L to

The appeal is allowed to the above extent

ITA/462/2016HC Delhi23 Aug 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 21Section 23Section 28

…still remains to be constituted. 14. Tofan Singh (supra) was also noted in a very recent decision of the Supreme Court, speaking through Uday Umesh Lalit, J., in Surinder Kumar Khanna v. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, (2018) 8 SCC 271. 15. Clearly, therefore, the position, in law, regarding the admissibility of a statement, recorded by an officer of the CBN, under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, the relevancy of such statement, the issue of whether such an officer would be treated as a ―police officer‖, CRL.A. 462/2016…

89. In Surinder Kumar Khanna v. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (8 SCC 271) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax