Janakiraman v. State

1 SCC 697Reported decision2006#21756 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2018.

Judgments citing Janakiraman v. State

Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S Prasadhini Enterprises Pvt Ltd

Appeal is dismissed as devoid of merits

ITA/390/2012HC Karnataka16 Jul 2018

Bench: The Hon' Ble Mr. Justice B. Veerappa Regular Second Appeal No.390/2012 (Res)

Section 100

…s Court exercising power under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 37. In support of his contentions, learned Senior Counsel relied upon the following judgements: 44 i) R. Janakiraman –vs- State reported in (2006) 1 SCC 697 with regard to ‘make- believe’ and not real. (para-26 and 27) ii) State of Andhra Pradesh –vs- Star Bone Mill & Fertiliser Co., reported in (2013) 9 SCC 319 with regard to paramount title; iii) Hope Plantations Ltd –vs- Taluk Land Board, Peermade reported in (1999) 5 SCC 590 (para-26) iv) Jamnadas –vs- J.J. Fareet reported in AIR 1…

CIT vs. J. H. Finvest Pvt. Ltd

ITA/28/2015HC Delhi30 Nov 2015

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

…ch can be applied to the facts of this case. CS(COMM) No.28/2015 & CS(COMM) No.27/2015 Page 11 of 22 16. The counsel for the defendant company has next referred to R. Janakiraman Vs. State (2006) 1 SCC 697 which is found to be on Sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act, 1872. Sections 91 and 92 provide for exclusion of oral by documentary evidence and for the terms of a contract, grant or other disposition of the property reduced in the form of a document being required to be proved by the said document only. I have enquired from the counsel for…

CIT vs. J. H. Finvest Pvt. Ltd

ITA/27/2015HC Delhi30 Nov 2015

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

…ch can be applied to the facts of this case. CS(COMM) No.28/2015 & CS(COMM) No.27/2015 Page 11 of 22 16. The counsel for the defendant company has next referred to R. Janakiraman Vs. State (2006) 1 SCC 697 which is found to be on Sections 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act, 1872. Sections 91 and 92 provide for exclusion of oral by documentary evidence and for the terms of a contract, grant or other disposition of the property reduced in the form of a document being required to be proved by the said document only. I have enquired from the counsel for…

Janakiraman v. State (1 SCC 697) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax