Superintendent of Police v. Nalini

Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I vs. Shri Suresh Nanda

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…d to an inference that the appellants acted with a common object then by virtue of Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, the acts of one would be attributable to others who shared the common object. 4.2. Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1999) 5 SCC 253 State v. Nalini while discussing the concept of conspiracy observed in sub para 7 of para 583: “7. A charge of conspiracy may prejudice the accused because it forces them into a joint trial and the court may consider the entire mass of evidence against every accused. Prosecution has to produce evidence not only to show that each of the acc…

Daikin Airconditioning India Pvt Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…d to an inference that the appellants acted with a common object then by virtue of Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, the acts of one would be attributable to others who shared the common object. 4.2. Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1999) 5 SCC 253 State v. Nalini while discussing the concept of conspiracy observed in sub para 7 of para 583: “7. A charge of conspiracy may prejudice the accused because it forces them into a joint trial and the court may consider the entire mass of evidence against every accused. Prosecution has to produce evidence not only to show that each of the acc…

Commissioner of Income Tax -XI vs. Amit Malhotra

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

…d to an inference that the appellants acted with a common object then by virtue of Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, the acts of one would be attributable to others who shared the common object. 4.2. Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1999) 5 SCC 253 State v. Nalini while discussing the concept of conspiracy observed in sub para 7 of para 583: “7. A charge of conspiracy may prejudice the accused because it forces them into a joint trial and the court may consider the entire mass of evidence against every accused. Prosecution has to produce evidence not only to show that each of the acc…

Pr. CIT Central-1 vs. Amrapali Grand

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…d to an inference that the appellants acted with a common object then by virtue of Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, the acts of one would be attributable to others who shared the common object. 4.2. Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1999) 5 SCC 253 State v. Nalini while discussing the concept of conspiracy observed in sub para 7 of para 583: “7. A charge of conspiracy may prejudice the accused because it forces them into a joint trial and the court may consider the entire mass of evidence against every accused. Prosecution has to produce evidence not only to show that each of the acc…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…d to an inference that the appellants acted with a common object then by virtue of Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, the acts of one would be attributable to others who shared the common object. 4.2. Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1999) 5 SCC 253 State v. Nalini while discussing the concept of conspiracy observed in sub para 7 of para 583: “7. A charge of conspiracy may prejudice the accused because it forces them into a joint trial and the court may consider the entire mass of evidence against every accused. Prosecution has to produce evidence not only to show that each of the acc…

Commissioner Ofincome Tax(Central)-II vs. Spn Milk Products Industries Pvt. Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…d to an inference that the appellants acted with a common object then by virtue of Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, the acts of one would be attributable to others who shared the common object. 4.2. Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1999) 5 SCC 253 State v. Nalini while discussing the concept of conspiracy observed in sub para 7 of para 583: “7. A charge of conspiracy may prejudice the accused because it forces them into a joint trial and the court may consider the entire mass of evidence against every accused. Prosecution has to produce evidence not only to show that each of the acc…

Commissioner of Income Tax-(Central)-I vs. Siddharath Sareen

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…d to an inference that the appellants acted with a common object then by virtue of Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, the acts of one would be attributable to others who shared the common object. 4.2. Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1999) 5 SCC 253 State v. Nalini while discussing the concept of conspiracy observed in sub para 7 of para 583: “7. A charge of conspiracy may prejudice the accused because it forces them into a joint trial and the court may consider the entire mass of evidence against every accused. Prosecution has to produce evidence not only to show that each of the acc…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Jubliant Oil & Gas Pvt.Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…d to an inference that the appellants acted with a common object then by virtue of Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, the acts of one would be attributable to others who shared the common object. 4.2. Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1999) 5 SCC 253 State v. Nalini while discussing the concept of conspiracy observed in sub para 7 of para 583: “7. A charge of conspiracy may prejudice the accused because it forces them into a joint trial and the court may consider the entire mass of evidence against every accused. Prosecution has to produce evidence not only to show that each of the acc…

Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central II) vs. P.D Associates (P). (Ltd)

The appeals are allowed

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…offence punishable as aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months, or with fine or with both. The Supreme Court in State through Superintendent of Police V Nalini & others, (1999) 5 SCC 253 discussed and summarized ingredients to constitute a criminal conspiracy which are as follows: i) Conspiracy is when two or more persons agree to do or cause to be done an illegal act or legal act by illegal means. ii) The offence of criminal conspiracy is an exception to the general law, where intent alone does not constitute crime. It is…