Tulsiram Sahadu Suryawanshi v. State of Maharashtra

10 SCC 373Reported decision2012#21784 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2022.

Judgments citing Tulsiram Sahadu Suryawanshi v. State of Maharashtra

ACIT Circle 2 vs. Niit Online Learning Ltd

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the additional grounds of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3903/DEL/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2022AY 2002-2003

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Special Counsel
Section 132Section 153A

…ave and this was full justification for the Tribunals refusing the leave.” E. EXISTENCE OF A FACT CAN ALSO BE PROVED BY THE EXISTENCE OF OTHER FACTS (THE BURDEN REMAINING STATIC) 25. In the case of Tulsiram Sahadu Suryawanshi v. State of Maharashtra, (2012) 10 SCC 373, the Hon’ble Supreme Court while examining the scope of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (“Evidence Act”) held as follows: - “23. ...We make it clear that this section is not intended to relieve the prosecution of its burden to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, but it would apply to cases where the prosecution ha…

ACIT Circle 2 vs. Niit Online Learning Ltd

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the additional grounds of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3902/DEL/2006[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2022AY 2004-2005

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Special Counsel
Section 132Section 153A

…ave and this was full justification for the Tribunals refusing the leave.” E. EXISTENCE OF A FACT CAN ALSO BE PROVED BY THE EXISTENCE OF OTHER FACTS (THE BURDEN REMAINING STATIC) 25. In the case of Tulsiram Sahadu Suryawanshi v. State of Maharashtra, (2012) 10 SCC 373, the Hon’ble Supreme Court while examining the scope of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (“Evidence Act”) held as follows: - “23. ...We make it clear that this section is not intended to relieve the prosecution of its burden to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, but it would apply to cases where the prosecution ha…

ACIT Circle 2 vs. Niit Online Learning Ltd

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the additional grounds of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3901/DEL/2006[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Aug 2022AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. G. C. Srivastava, Special Counsel
Section 132Section 153A

…ave and this was full justification for the Tribunals refusing the leave.” E. EXISTENCE OF A FACT CAN ALSO BE PROVED BY THE EXISTENCE OF OTHER FACTS (THE BURDEN REMAINING STATIC) 25. In the case of Tulsiram Sahadu Suryawanshi v. State of Maharashtra, (2012) 10 SCC 373, the Hon’ble Supreme Court while examining the scope of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (“Evidence Act”) held as follows: - “23. ...We make it clear that this section is not intended to relieve the prosecution of its burden to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, but it would apply to cases where the prosecution ha…

Tulsiram Sahadu Suryawanshi v. State of Maharashtra (10 SCC 373) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax