State of U.P v. Dr Vijay Anand Maharaj

1 SCR 1Reported decision1963#18535 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2019.

Judgments citing State of U.P v. Dr Vijay Anand Maharaj

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Koundinya Educational Society

ITTA/179/2019HC Andhra Pradesh29 Oct 2019

Bench: C.PRAVEEN KUMAR,CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

…Ed. 255 180. (1990) 1 SCC 109 181. (2010) 5 SCC 246 182. (2004) 2 SCC 553 183. (1981) 4 SCC 391 184. AIR 1959 SC 544 185. AIR 1955 SC 504 186. (1983) 4 SCC 166 187. (1990) 2 SCC 562 188. 1969 (1) SCC 509 189. [1968] 1 SCR 561 190. [1954] 1 SCR 1 191. [1959] Supp.1 S.C.R. 319 192. (1970) ILLJ 633 SC 193. AIR 1955 SC 549 194. (1997) 2 SCC 453 195. (1930) A.C. 124 CJ, MSM,J and DVSS,J W.P.Nos.13203 of 2020 & batch 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY AN…

Religare Capital Markets Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1763/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…lain and unambiguous, and admits of only one meaning, no question of construction of a statute arises for the Act speaks for itself. The meaning must be collected from the expressed intention of the legislature. (State of U.P. v. Dr Vijay Anand Maharaj (1963) 1 SCR 1. In construing a statutory provision, the first and foremost rule of construction is the literal construction. All that the court has to see at the very outset is what does that provision say. If the provision is unambiguous and if, from that provision, the legislative intent is clear, the court need not call into aid other rules of construction of s…

M/S Religare Capital Markets Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1881/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: PendingITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr AdvoateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…lain and unambiguous, and admits of only one meaning, no question of construction of a statute arises for the Act speaks for itself. The meaning must be collected from the expressed intention of the legislature. (State of U.P. v. Dr Vijay Anand Maharaj (1963) 1 SCR 1. In construing a statutory provision, the first and foremost rule of construction is the literal construction. All that the court has to see at the very outset is what does that provision say. If the provision is unambiguous and if, from that provision, the legislative intent is clear, the court need not call into aid other rules of construction of s…

Shreemad Jagadguru Shankaracharya vs. State of Karnataka

WA/2843/2014HC Karnataka09 Feb 2015

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,N.ANANDA

Section 23Section 4Section 482

…1 ® IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANANDA WRIT APPEAL No.2843 OF 2014 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: Shreemad Jagadguru Shankaracharya Shree Shree Raghaveshwara Bharathi Swamiji (Formerly known as Sri. Harish Sharma), Aged about 39 years, Shree Samsthana – Gokarna, Shree Ramachandrapura Muth, Hosanagara, Haniya Post, Thirthahalli Taluk, Shimoga District and Also at Ramashrama, No.2A, J.P.Road, Girinagar, Bangalore – 560 085. … APPELLAN…

State of U.P v. Dr Vijay Anand Maharaj (1 SCR 1) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax