Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu

16 SCC 31Reported decision2013#22870 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,627 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2016.

Judgments citing Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu

Girish Raghunath Mehta vs. Inspector of Customs

The appeals are dismissed

Crl.A. No.-001020-001021 - 2009Supreme Court07 Sept 2016
Section 15Section 42Section 67Section 8

…tatement. The statement was not voluntary. Its contents were not read over to him. A-2 was also in custody and his statement was also not voluntary. Statement of co-accused could not 1 (2000) 2 SCC 513 2 (2016) 6 SCALE 32 3 (2013) 2 SCC 212 4 (2013) 16 SCC 31 5 (2009) 12 SCC 161 6 (2009) 16 SCC 496 7 (2008) 16 SCC 417 Page 6 JUDGMENT 6 be taken as substantive evidence. The same could not be relied upon in view of the decision in Bal Mukund and Raju Premji (supra). 8. Learned counsel for the State supports the conviction and sentence of the appellant. He submitted that concurrent finding…

Girish Raghunath Mehta vs. Inspector of Customs

The appeals are dismissed

Crl.A. No.-001020-001021 - 2009Supreme Court07 Sept 2016
Section 15Section 42Section 67Section 8

…tatement. The statement was not voluntary. Its contents were not read over to him. A-2 was also in custody and his statement was also not voluntary. Statement of co-accused could not 1 (2000) 2 SCC 513 2 (2016) 6 SCALE 32 3 (2013) 2 SCC 212 4 (2013) 16 SCC 31 5 (2009) 12 SCC 161 6 (2009) 16 SCC 496 7 (2008) 16 SCC 417 Page 6 JUDGMENT 6 be taken as substantive evidence. The same could not be relied upon in view of the decision in Bal Mukund and Raju Premji (supra). 8. Learned counsel for the State supports the conviction and sentence of the appellant. He submitted that concurrent finding…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-2 vs. M/S Bose Corporation (India) Pvt. L to

The appeal is allowed to the above extent

ITA/462/2016HC Delhi23 Aug 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 21Section 23Section 28

…e provisions of Section 50 of the Act which are mandatory have also not been complied with.‖ 13. In view of this difference in view, a later bench of the Supreme Court, speaking through A.K. Sikri, J. held, in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2013) 16 SCC 31, that the matter deserved to be referred to a Larger Bench - which still remains to be constituted. 14. Tofan Singh (supra) was also noted in a very recent decision of the Supreme Court, speaking through Uday Umesh Lalit, J., in Surinder Kumar Khanna v. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, (2018) 8 SCC 271. 15. Cle…

Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu (16 SCC 31) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax