Johri Lal Soni v. Smt. Bhanwari Bai

4 SCC 59Reported decision1977#20757 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2021.

Judgments citing Johri Lal Soni v. Smt. Bhanwari Bai

Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-2, Delhi vs. Pt Lp Display Indonesia

ITA/145/2021HC Delhi21 Sept 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

Section 34Section 89

…Tower Hamlets London Borough Council (1976) 1 W.L.R. 852. c. New Horizon Limited v. Union of India (1997) Co. cases 785 (Del). d. New Horizon Limited v. Union of India (1995) 1 SCC 478. e. State of U.P. v. Renu Sagar Power Company (1988) 4 SCC 59. f. Jones v. Lipman [1962] 1 All ER 442. g. Gilford Motor Co. Ltd. v. Horn (1933) ALL ER REP 109.”” 48. According to Mr. Tripathi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the GNCTD, the aforesaid decision is clearly distinguishable on facts as was noticed by a learned Judge of the same High Court who had refused to invoke or adopt the prin…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri.M.R.Janakiram (HUF)

The appeal is allowed

WTA/19/2015HC Karnataka29 Jan 2020

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH

Section 449Section 456Section 456(1)Section 456(2)Section 483

…- 1 - OSA No. 19 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORIGINAL SIDE APPEAL NO. 19 OF 2015 BETWEEN: 1. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR OF THE MYSORE KIRLOSKAR LTD., (IN LIQN.) ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CORPORATE BHAVAN, NO.26-27, 12TH FLOOR, RAHEJA TOWERS, M.G.ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 …APPELLANT (BY SMT. KRUTIKA RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.S. MAHADEVAN, ADVOCATE/OL) AND: 1. M/S. KIRLOSKAR INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED MANAGEMEN…

Commissioner of Income tax-VI vs. M/s. Narpat Girji Constructions

ITTA/19/2015HC Telangana25 Mar 2015

Ishaan Labs Pvt Ltd vs. Union of India Rep by the Secretary

WP/6585/2004HC Karnataka06 Aug 2012

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VIKRAMAJIT SEN (CJ)

…pinion or satisfaction requisite under the legislation. In any one of these situations 21 it can well be said that the authority did not honestly form its opinion or that in forming it, it did not apply its mind to the relevant facts".. In Renusagar, [1988] 4 SCC 59, 104 (AIR 1988 SC 1737, 1763), Mukharji, J., as he then was, states: "The exercise of power whether legislative or administrative will be set aside if there is manifest error in the exercise of such power or the exercise of the power is manifestly arbitrary. Similarly, if the power has been exercised on a non-consideration or non-application of…