Kehar Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.)

Kerala State Beverages Manufacturing and Marketing Corporation Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1)

Accordingly, the civil appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

…e. The said judgment only considers whether the levy of water tax under Section 52A of the U.P. Water Supply and Sewerage Act is a fee or whether it is a tax covered by Entry 49 of List II of the seventh schedule 4 (2003) 5 SCC 622 5 (2003) 4 SCC 305 6 (2001) 3 SCC 609 27 C.A.@S.L.P.(C)No.12859 of 2020 etc. to the Constitution. The said judgment in fact maintains and does not take away the basic constitutional distinction between ‘fee’ and ‘tax’. Having regard to language used in Section 40(a)(iib), we are of the view that the aforesaid judgment does not support the case of the revenue. Even the other alternat…

Shri. Parswanath vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

…320) “Put very briefly, the distinction between the offence of abetment under the second clause of Section 107 and that of criminal conspiracy under Section 120-A is this. In the former offence 2 (1988) 3 SCC 609 13 a mere combination of persons or agreement between them is not enough. An act or illegal omission must take place in pursuance of the conspiracy and in order to the doing of the thing conspired for; in the latter offence the mere agreement is enough, if the agreement is to commit an offence. So far as abetment by conspiracy is…

M/S Canon India Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Customs

In the result, these appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

…ave exercised power under Section 28 (4), it could have used the word ‘any’. 11. Parliament has employed the article “the” not accidently but with the intention to designate the proper officer who had assessed the goods at the time of 3 (2001) 3 SCC 609 6 clearance. It must be clarified that the proper officer need not be the very officer who cleared the goods but may be his successor in office or any other officer authorised to exercise the powers within the same office. In this case, anyone authorised from the Appraisal Group. Assessment is a term which includes determination of the dutiabi…

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Koundinya Educational Society

Bench: C.PRAVEEN KUMAR,CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

…731 144. 2007 (14) Scale 36 145. (2014) 9 SCC 1 146. AIR 1994 SC 268 147. AIR 1951 SC 332 148. (2011) 10 SCC 608 149. (2016) 11 SCC 378 150. 1980 (Supp) SCC 601 151. 1998) 1 SCC 226 152. (1984) 3 SCC 16 153. (2006) 3 SCC 643 154. (2001) 3 SCC 609 155. 1963 SC 1241 156. AIR 1961 AP 50 157. AIR 1967 SC 944 158. AIR 2005 SC 862 159. (1992) 73 CLT 567 160. 1982) 3 SCC 519 161. (2016) 8 SCC 509 162. (2002) 8 SCC 228 163. (2018) 14 SCC 408 164. (2002) 2 SCC 459 165. (2015) 14 SCC 327 166. (2016) 11 SCC 31 CJ, MSM,J and DVSS,J W.P.Nos.13203 of 2020 & batch 6 167.…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. K. V. Srinivasa Rao

…rcumstantial evidence, the lack of direct evidence relating to conspiracy has no consequence. (See E.K. Chandrasenan v. State of Kerala [(1995) 2 SCC 99 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 329 : AIR 1995 SC 1066] .) 43. In Kehar Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) [(1988) 3 SCC 609 : 1988 SCC (Cri) 711 : AIR 1988 SC 1883] (AIR at p. 1954) this Court observed : (SCC pp. 732-33, para 275) “275. Generally, a conspiracy is hatched in secrecy and it may be difficult to adduce direct evidence of the same. The prosecution will often rely on evidence of acts of various parties to infer that they were done in reference to their…

Commissioner of Income Tax-I vs. M/s. BDR Projects Pvt. Ltd