P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE)

4 SCC 626Reported decision1998#17850 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2003 to 2025.

Judgments citing P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE)

Pr. Commissioner Oflncome Tax -21 vs. M/S.Remfry&Sagar

ITA/199/2017HC Delhi31 Jan 2025

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 37

…ely misconceived nature of such an interpretation was dealt with in a similar interpretation of the provisions of the PC Act, by a Constitution Bench of this Court in P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE) [P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE), (1998) 4 SCC 626 : 1998 SCC (Cri) 1108] . Prior to the 2018 Amendment [Subs. Section 8, Act 16 of 2018, w.e.f. 26-7-2018.] , the PC Act only punished the bribe-taker who was a public servant, and not the bribe-giver. Reliance was placed on this to acquit the appellant bribe-giver. Rejecting such an interpretation, this Court held:…

Pr. Commissioner Oflncome Tax -21 vs. M/S.Remfry&Sagar

ITA-199/2017HC Delhi31 Jan 2025

Section 37

M/S Apex Laboratories P. Ltd vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Large Tax Payer Unit II

The appeal is dismissed without order on costs

C.A. No.-001554-001554 - 2022Supreme Court22 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 142(1)Section 37(1)

…such an interpretation was dealt with in a similar interpretation of the provisions of PC Act, by a Constitution Bench of this Court in P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE)21. Prior to the 2018 amendment22, the PC Act only punished the bribe- 21 (1998) 4 SCC 626. 22 Subs. Section 8, Act 16 of 2018, w.e.f. 26.07.2018. 13 taker who was a public servant, and not the bribe-giver. Reliance was placed on this to acquit the appellant bribe-giver. Rejecting such an interpretation, this Court held: “145. Mr Rao submitted that since, by reason of the provisions of Article 105(2), the alleged bribe-…

Sri B V Acharya S/O Late Ramachandra Acharya vs. Sri N Venkateshaiah

WP/14047/2012HC Karnataka03 Aug 2012

Bench: V.JAGANNATHAN

Section 156(3)Section 482

…eported in AIR 1962 SC 876 as well as the other decisions reported in 1985(2) VII Crimes 132, 1997 Crl.L.J. 4383, 2002 III AD Delhi 1051, 2003 Crl.L.J. 866, 2004 Crl.L.J. 2633, 2010(2) SCC (Cri) 1085, 2003 SCC (Cri) 1305, (1984)2 SCC 500, (2007)1 SCC 1, (1998)4 SCC 626, 2011(11) ILR-CUT-894, (2006)6 SCC 728 and (2012)1 SCC 130. 23 31. The submission therefore made is that the impugned order of the learned Special Judge does not call for any interference by this court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India or under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 32. Concerning the decision of the Apex Court in Subra…

M/S. Amco Batteries Ltd., Bangalore vs. Commnr. of Central Excise, Bangalore

In the result, Section 33-B of the Amended Act is held to be

C.A. No.-005941-005942 - 1999Supreme Court26 Feb 2003

For Respondent: Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore

Section 3

…http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 55 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 5941-5942 of 1999 PETITIONER: M/s Amco Batteries Limited, Bangalore RESPONDENT: Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore DATE OF JUDGMENT: 26/02/2003 BENCH: M.B. SHAH & D. M. DHARMADHIKARI JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T Shah, J. It is apparent that in taxation matters, amendments, clarifications, exemption notifications or their withdrawal play an important role in increasing litigation. Repeatedly, it is stated that law and procedure thereunder is required to be streamlined and simplified, yet clarifications, amendments and not…