Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar

8 SCC 751Reported decision2009#25671 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 346,713 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2021.

Judgments citing Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. Nipha Exports Pvt Ltd

ITAT/107/2021HC Calcutta08 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

Section 420

…Lal Kapoor reported in (2013) 3 SCC 330; Rajeswar Tiwari & Ors. –Vs. – Nanda Kishore Roy reported in (2010) 8 SCC 442; Bank of Baroda –Vs. – Govind Ram Agarwal reported in (2007) 3 CHN 60; Md. Ibrahim & Ors. –Vs. – State of Bihar & Ors. reported in (2009) 8 SCC 751; Vinod Natesan –Vs. – State of Kerala & Ors. reported in (2019) 2 SCC 401. Mr. Sabyasachi Banerjee, learned Advocate appearing for the complainant/opposite party denied the allegations advanced by the learned Advocate appearing for the accused/petitioner although he admitted that the petitioner and the opposite party are married since…

Opto Circuit India Ltd vs. Axis Bank

WP/8031/2020HC Karnataka13 Aug 2020

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit

Section 120BSection 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)Section 482

…egations made in the complaint.... In our view, the High Court had no jurisdiction to appreciate the evidence of the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code." Similarly, what the Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of Bihar, (2009) 8 SCC 751 observed, is also relevant: "8. This Court has time and again drawn attention to the growing tendency of 16 complainants attempting to give the cloak of a criminal offence to matters which are essentially and purely civil in nature, obviously either to apply pressure on the accused, or out of enmity towards the accused, or to s…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 7 vs. M/S Qns Facility Management Pvt. Ltd

Accordingly, the instant petition stands dismissed along with the

ITA/440/2018HC Delhi13 Apr 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

…dence to show that the document was executed claiming it to be someone else's or has been altered or tampered, no offence under Sections 464, 468, 471 or 474 IPC is made out. Reference may be made to the judgment in Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar (2009) 8 SCC 751. 56. The Ld. Additional Sessions Judge has successful applied the test, at the stage of charge and by the virtue of power laid upon him under the Code, that the court must have at least prima facie evidence in respect of the offences. As discussed herein above, the present case is a case of no evidence, not even leading to an inference of "m…