Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant

9 SCC 209Reported decision2010#14492 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 148Section 151

Issues it is cited on

section 144(3)section 110section 2(1)section 115wdsection 158bdsection 144basection 70protective assessmentsection 153a(1)(b)section 65bsection 158bcsection 65

Judgments citing Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant

Amol Awasthi, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-I, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

ITA 1348/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153C

…420……. 45. It has been held in Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1982 Bom 387 that the contents or the truthfulness of the contents of a document can be proved only by the executor of the document. The Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant (2010) 9 SCC 209 examined various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and held that "13. In State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Radha Krishna Singh & Ors. AIR 1983 SC 684, this Court dealt with a similar contention and held as under: - "Admissibility of a document is one thing and its probative value quite another these two aspects carinot be combined. A document may be admi…

Amol Awasthi, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

ITA 1347/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153C

…420……. 45. It has been held in Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1982 Bom 387 that the contents or the truthfulness of the contents of a document can be proved only by the executor of the document. The Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant (2010) 9 SCC 209 examined various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and held that "13. In State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Radha Krishna Singh & Ors. AIR 1983 SC 684, this Court dealt with a similar contention and held as under: - "Admissibility of a document is one thing and its probative value quite another these two aspects carinot be combined. A document may be admi…

Amol Awasthi, New Delhi vs. DCIT, C.C.1, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

ITA 1346/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153C

…420……. 45. It has been held in Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1982 Bom 387 that the contents or the truthfulness of the contents of a document can be proved only by the executor of the document. The Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant (2010) 9 SCC 209 examined various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and held that "13. In State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Radha Krishna Singh & Ors. AIR 1983 SC 684, this Court dealt with a similar contention and held as under: - "Admissibility of a document is one thing and its probative value quite another these two aspects carinot be combined. A document may be admi…

Amol Awasthi, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

ITA 1345/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153C

…420……. 45. It has been held in Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1982 Bom 387 that the contents or the truthfulness of the contents of a document can be proved only by the executor of the document. The Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant (2010) 9 SCC 209 examined various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and held that "13. In State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Radha Krishna Singh & Ors. AIR 1983 SC 684, this Court dealt with a similar contention and held as under: - "Admissibility of a document is one thing and its probative value quite another these two aspects carinot be combined. A document may be admi…

Amol Awasthi, New Delhi vs. DCIT, C.C.1, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

ITA 1344/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153C

…420……. 45. It has been held in Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1982 Bom 387 that the contents or the truthfulness of the contents of a document can be proved only by the executor of the document. The Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant (2010) 9 SCC 209 examined various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and held that "13. In State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Radha Krishna Singh & Ors. AIR 1983 SC 684, this Court dealt with a similar contention and held as under: - "Admissibility of a document is one thing and its probative value quite another these two aspects carinot be combined. A document may be admi…

Amol Awasthi, New Delhi vs. DCIT, C.C.1, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

ITA 1343/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153C

…420……. 45. It has been held in Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1982 Bom 387 that the contents or the truthfulness of the contents of a document can be proved only by the executor of the document. The Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant (2010) 9 SCC 209 examined various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and held that "13. In State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Radha Krishna Singh & Ors. AIR 1983 SC 684, this Court dealt with a similar contention and held as under: - "Admissibility of a document is one thing and its probative value quite another these two aspects carinot be combined. A document may be admi…

Amol Awasthi, New Delhi vs. DCIT, C.C.1, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are allowed, as indicated

ITA 1342/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153ASection 153C

…420……. 45. It has been held in Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1982 Bom 387 that the contents or the truthfulness of the contents of a document can be proved only by the executor of the document. The Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant (2010) 9 SCC 209 examined various pronouncements of the Supreme Court and held that "13. In State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Radha Krishna Singh & Ors. AIR 1983 SC 684, this Court dealt with a similar contention and held as under: - "Admissibility of a document is one thing and its probative value quite another these two aspects carinot be combined. A document may be admi…

Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant (9 SCC 209) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax