MICHAEL ESTY FERGUSON v. HER MAJESY THE QUEEN 36

5 SCC 478Reported decision2009#1131 most cited
99

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Also referred to as

Michael Esty Ferguson · 5 SCC 478 · burden of proof · procedural law · substantive rights · right to defend · jurisdictional fact · tribunal jurisdiction · special court jurisdiction · presumption of innocence

Judgments citing MICHAEL ESTY FERGUSON v. HER MAJESY THE QUEEN 36

B T KANTHARAJ vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/27680/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

NANJUNDAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/47827/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

THARIQ KHAN vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/8585/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SMT JANAKI vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/28215/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SMT. LAKSHMAMMA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/6960/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SRI SHIVALINGAIAH vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/6376/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SRI H K BASAVEGOWDA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/28214/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SMT. PRIYADARSHINI vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/35277/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

MOOSAVEER @ IBRAHIM SAB vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/13029/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

N SANTHOSH KUMAR vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/22667/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SRI C GOVARDHAN REDDY vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/36459/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SRI RAJANNA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/18646/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SMT. MOTAMMA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

WP/25219/2017HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

K T THIPPERUDRAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/50828/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SRI A M NARAYANASWAMY vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/8210/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SRI M B DEVAYYA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/18327/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SMT UMA BALAGAVI vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/23800/2017HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

MR G PULLA REDDY vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/56168/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SMT. B.C.DHARMA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/31322/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

SRI SRIKANTH vs. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

WP/22025/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

…r the ultimate burden of proof resting upon the prosecution, nor deprive the defendant of the benefit of the presumption of innocence." 95. Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of V.LAXMINARASAMMA vs A YADAIAH (DEAD) AND OTHERS reported in (2009)5 SCC 478 has held that only because the burden of proof is on the noticee, the same would not mean that he has been deprived of his right to defend in the proceedings. It is further held: "36. Only because the burden xxx proceedings. Burden of proof is in the realm of procedural law. By reason of such a provision, substantive right of the pa…

Showing 1–20 of 99 · Page 1 of 5

MICHAEL ESTY FERGUSON v. HER MAJESY THE QUEEN 36 (5 SCC 478) — Cited in 99 Judgments | BharatTax