How many judgments cite State of A.P v. T. Suryachandra Rao?

23 judgments on BharatTax cite State of A.P v. T. Suryachandra Rao (6 SCC 149), spanning 2020 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does State of A.P v. T. Suryachandra Rao come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 36(1)(va), Section 132, Section 132(1), Section 132(3).

State of A.P v. T. Suryachandra Rao

6 SCC 149Reported decision2005#5071 most cited

What is State of A.P v. T. Suryachandra Rao authority for?

A decision obtained by fraud is a nullity and can be challenged at any time, in any court, as fraud vitiates every solemn act.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2025.

Also referred to as

State of A.P v. T. Suryachandra Rao · fraud vitiates · judgment obtained by fraud · nullity · challenge any court · non-est · solemn act · fraud and justice · A.V.PapayyaSastry

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153A Section 36(1)(va)Section 132 Section 132(1)Section 132(3)Section 132(4)Section 139

Issues it is cited on

section 132(3)section 2(45)section 271aab section 22 mere change of opinion section 271aa section 132(1)section 270 section 271a section 127 commercial expediency change of opinion

Judgments citing State of A.P v. T. Suryachandra Rao

Nuziveedu Seeds Limited, R.R.Dist vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1457/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sriram SeshadriFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai

Section 10(1)Section 115JSection 14A

…unravels everything.” In the same judgment Lord Parker, L.J. observed that fraud vitiates all transactions known to the law of however high a degree of solemnity. (p. 722) These aspects were recently highlighted in State of A.P. v. T. Suryachandra Rao (2005) 6 SCC 149.” 8. In Ram Chandra Singh v. Savitri Devi (2003) 8 SCC 319 it was held thus: “15. x x x Fraud as is well known vitiates every solemn act. Fraud and justice never dwell together. 16. Fraud is a conduct either by letter or words, which induces the other person or authority to take a definite determinative stand as a response to the conduct of the for…

Nuziveedu Seeds Limited, R.R.Dist vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals under consideration are treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1456/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sriram SeshadriFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai

Section 10(1)Section 115JSection 14A

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bhavya Merchandise Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeals by the revenue are dismissed and cross-objections by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2148/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2020AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Mr. R.P. Agarwal, Advocate &For Respondent: Mr. Imokaba Jamir, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…that the party who secured such a decision by fraud cannot be allowed to enjoy its fruits. The learned senior counsel also relied on the observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Andhra Pradesh and another Vs. T.Suryachandra Rao reported in (2005) 6 SCC 149 to the effect that the fraud vitiates every solemn Act and fraud and justice never dwell together. In A.V.Papayya Sastry and Others Vs. Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh and others reported in (2007) 4 Supreme Court Cases 221 also, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that fraud vitiates all judicial acts whether in rem or in personam and that a judgment,…