Kumar Exports v. Sharma Carpets

Commissioner, Customs Central Excise and Service Tax, Patna vs. M/S. Shapoorji Paloonji and Company Pvt Ltd and Ors

The appeals are dismissed, without

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA

…ble so as to achieve the legislative object, when there is vagueness, ambiguity or absurdity. The purpose of interpretation is not to make a provision what the Judge thinks it should be, but to make it what the legislature intended it to be.” 16 (2010) 2 SCC 513 19 24. In the present case, the word “or” between sub-clauses (i) and (ii) indicates the independent and disjunctive nature of sub-clause (i), meaning thereby that “or” used after sub-clause (i) cannot be interpreted as “and” so as to tie it with the condition enumerated in the long line of clause 2(s) which is applicable only to sub-clau…

The Director of Income Tax vs. Vodithala Education Society

Bench: A Closer Look At The Grounds Urged In The Memo Of Appeal, It Shall Be Apt To Have An Overview Of The Backgrounds Facts. Factual Background 3. The Gravamen Of Charge Against The Respondent Is That He Borrowed An Amount Of Rs. 20.00 Lacs From The Appellant & In Lieu, Issued A Cheque Bearing No. 2225230 Dated 03.05.2007, Drawn On The Citizens Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Vinayak Bazar, Jammu. The Appellant Presented The Cheque To His Banker, Jcc Bank, Jammu For Collection, Which On Presentation Came To Be Dishonoured

…consideration and the holder thereof received the same in discharge of an existing debt, the said presumption, in terms of Sections 118 and 139 of NI Act, can be rebutted by the accused by 4 (2009) 2 SCC 513 5 (2008) 1 SCC 258 6 [2008 A.I.R. (SC) 1325] 7 (2013) 3 SCC 86 8 (2008) CrlJ 2405 6 CRAA 243/2014 bringing on record such facts and circumstances, which may lead the court to conclude, either that the consider…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, CIT(A) vs. M/S Danish Steel Cluster Pvt Ltd

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr Justice P.N.Desai Criminal Appeal No. 18 Of 2017 Between: B Nagalakshmamma Aged About 32 Years, W/O Nataraju M.C., R/O Opp. To Ex-Counsellor, Channapatna, 12Th Main, 1St Cross, Ramanagara District, Channapatna, Also At: No.39/40, Hp Company, Hamlet Packard Global, Software Ltd., Electronic City, Bangalore 100.

…been as to whether the appellant-accused has brought on record such facts/material/circumstances which could be of a reasonably probable defence. 23. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kumar Exports Vs. Sharma Carpets, reported in (2009) 2 SCC 513 discussed with regard to raising presumption under Sections 118 & 139 of N.I Act, and also under Section 114 of Evidence - 20 - CRL.A No. 18 of 2017 Act. If something probable has been brought on record then the burden of which shifted to the complainant. The accused has to bring on record only such facts and circumstances up…

Girish Raghunath Mehta vs. Inspector of Customs

The appeals are dismissed

…appellant was in custody at the time of recording the statement. The statement was not voluntary. Its contents were not read over to him. A-2 was also in custody and his statement was also not voluntary. Statement of co-accused could not 1 (2000) 2 SCC 513 2 (2016) 6 SCALE 32 3 (2013) 2 SCC 212 4 (2013) 16 SCC 31 5 (2009) 12 SCC 161 6 (2009) 16 SCC 496 7 (2008) 16 SCC 417 Page 6 JUDGMENT 6 be taken as substantive evidence. The same could not be relied upon in view of the decision in Bal Mukund and Raju Premji (supra). 8. Learned counsel for the State supports the conviction and sentenc…

Girish Raghunath Mehta vs. Inspector of Customs

The appeals are dismissed

…appellant was in custody at the time of recording the statement. The statement was not voluntary. Its contents were not read over to him. A-2 was also in custody and his statement was also not voluntary. Statement of co-accused could not 1 (2000) 2 SCC 513 2 (2016) 6 SCALE 32 3 (2013) 2 SCC 212 4 (2013) 16 SCC 31 5 (2009) 12 SCC 161 6 (2009) 16 SCC 496 7 (2008) 16 SCC 417 Page 6 JUDGMENT 6 be taken as substantive evidence. The same could not be relied upon in view of the decision in Bal Mukund and Raju Premji (supra). 8. Learned counsel for the State supports the conviction and sentenc…

The Commisisoner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/S Lokesh Machines Limited

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

The Commisioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S.Clear Water Technologies

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs Justice K.S.Mudagal

…v. Baby20 5 2021 SCC Online SC 201 6 2021 SCC Online SC 788 7 2021 SCC Online Bom. 5162 8 2021 SCC Online SC 325 9 (2018) 1 SCC 560 10 (2015) 9 SCC 622 11 2017 SCC Online Ker 23924 12 (2009) 2 SCC 513 13 (2020) 4 SCC 695 14 (2019) 4 SCC 197 15 (2019) 18 SCC 106 16 (2020) 2 SCC 514 17 (2021) 5 SCC 283 18 (2015) 17 SCC 368 19 (2015) 8 SCC 378 20 (2012) 1 SCC 260 Crl.A.No.391/2014 8 M Submissions of Sri Chandrashekaran, learned Counsel for the respondent/accused in support of the impugned order:…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. The Bilagi Pattan Sahakari Bank Niyamith

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr Justice S.Rachaiah Criminal Appeal No. 100007 Of 2015 (A)

…his burden, yet mere denial would not fulfil the requirements of rebuttal as envisaged under Section 118 and 139 of the N.I.Act. This court stated the principles in Kumar - 11 - CRL.A No. 100007 of 2015 Exports Vs. Sharma Carpets, (2009) 2 SCC 513 as follows: "20. The accused in a trial under Section 138 of the Act has two options. He can either show that consideration and debt did not exist or that under the particular circumstances of the case the non- existence of consideration and debt is so probable that a prudent man ought to suppose that no consideration and debt existed. To…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. The Hungund Taluka Teacher

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Ravi V.Hosmani

…serious doubt about financial capacity of complainant to lend such huge sum. Such effort on the part of accused satisfies the parameters for rebuttal of presumption as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kumar Exports V/s Sharma Carpets, reported in (2009) 2 SCC 513, wherein it is held that: “The accused may adduce direct evidence to prove that the note in question was not supported by consideration and that there was 14 no debt or liability to be discharged by him. However, the court need not insist in every case that the accused should disprove the non-existence of consideration and debt by lead…

Sasi Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Egmore), Chennai, For The Willful & Deliberate Failure To File Returns For The Assessment Years 1991-92, 1992-93 & Hence Committing Offences Punishable Under Section 276 Cc Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”). Complaints Were Filed On 21.8.1997 After Getting The Sanction From The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Ii, Chennai Under Section 279(1) Of The Income Tax Act. Appellants Filed Two Discharge Petitions Under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C., Which Were Dismissed By The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vide Order Dated 14.6.2006. Appellants Preferred Crl. R.C. Nos.781 To 786 Of 2006 Before The High Court Of Madras Which Were Dismissed By The High Court Vide Its Common Order Dated 2.12.2006, Which Are The Subject Matters Of These Appeals.

…Page 1 JUDGMENT 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.61 OF 2007 Sasi Enterprises … Appellant Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax … Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs.62, 63 & 64 OF 2007 J U D G M E N T K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. We are concerned with four Criminal Appeals No.61 to 64 of 2007, out of which two Criminal Appeals No.61 of 2007 and 63 of 2007 relate to M/s Sasi Enterprises, a registered partnership firm, of which Ms. J. Jayalalitha and Mrs. N. Sasikala are partners, which relate to the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93…

Sasi Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Egmore), Chennai, For The Willful & Deliberate Failure To File Returns For The Assessment Years 1991-92, 1992-93 & Hence Committing Offences Punishable Under Section 276 Cc Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”). Complaints Were Filed On 21.8.1997 After Getting The Sanction From The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Ii, Chennai Under Section 279(1) Of The Income Tax Act. Appellants Filed Two Discharge Petitions Under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C., Which Were Dismissed By The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vide Order Dated 14.6.2006. Appellants Preferred Crl. R.C. Nos.781 To 786 Of 2006 Before The High Court Of Madras Which Were Dismissed By The High Court Vide Its Common Order Dated 2.12.2006, Which Are The Subject Matters Of These Appeals.

…Page 1 JUDGMENT 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.61 OF 2007 Sasi Enterprises … Appellant Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax … Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs.62, 63 & 64 OF 2007 J U D G M E N T K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. We are concerned with four Criminal Appeals No.61 to 64 of 2007, out of which two Criminal Appeals No.61 of 2007 and 63 of 2007 relate to M/s Sasi Enterprises, a registered partnership firm, of which Ms. J. Jayalalitha and Mrs. N. Sasikala are partners, which relate to the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO