Supreme Court of India

8,449 judgments

Year:

Yogesh Navinchandra Ravani v. Nanjibhai Sagrambhai Chaudhary

25 Apr 2023 · B. R. Gavai; Vikram Nath

The Supreme Court held that a cancelled Power of Attorney holder cannot restore a withdrawn appeal and quashed the High Court's restoration order and strictures against the advocate.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Power of Attorney Legal Representatives Second Appeal Restoration of Appeal

Amresh Kumar Sinha v. State of Bihar

25 Apr 2023 · B. R. Gavai; Pankaj Mithal

The Supreme Court held that higher educational qualifications prescribed for promotion are not required for grant of ACP benefits, which are purely financial upgradations to avoid stagnation.

service_law appeal_allowed Significant Assured Career Progression ACP Scheme financial upgradation promotion

Shanti Bhushan thr. Lr. & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.

25 Apr 2023 · Abhay S. Oka; Rajesh Bindal
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

Stamp duty on sale deeds must be calculated on the market value of the property on the date of execution, considering tenancy encumbrances, with the matter remanded for fresh valuation and adjudication.

tax appeal_allowed Significant stamp duty market value Indian Stamp Act 1899 Section 47-A

Income Tax Commissioner v. Prakash Chand Luvinya

24 Apr 2023 · M. M. Sundesh · 2023 INSC 416
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that penal confiscation of seized goods cannot be treated as business income under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, upholding the addition and penalty against the assessee engaged in silver business.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 69A Seized goods Business income

Commissioner of Income Tax Jaipur v. Prakash Chand Lunia

24 Apr 2023 · M. R. Shah

The Supreme Court held that loss on confiscation of smuggled goods is not allowable as business loss under the Income Tax Act, distinguishing the Piara Singh precedent and upholding tax additions under Section 69A.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 69A Section 37(1) Explanation 1

Income Tax Commissioner, Jaipur v. Prakash Chand Lunia & Ors.

24 Apr 2023 · M. R. Shah; M. M. Sundresh

The Supreme Court held that loss due to seizure of goods involved in illegal activity is not a deductible business loss under the Income Tax Act and set aside the High Court's allowance of such claim.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act 1961 Section 69A Section 37(1) business loss

Commissioner of Income Tax Jaipur v. Prakash Chand Lunia

24 Apr 2023 · M. R. Shah
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that loss on confiscation of goods due to illegal acts in a legitimate business is not allowable as business loss under the Income Tax Act, overruling the High Court's contrary decision relying on Piara Singh.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 69A Section 37(1) Explanation 1

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3 v. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd.

24 Apr 2023 · M. R. Shah; Sudhanshu Dhulia · 2023 INSC 417

The Supreme Court held that under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, the Assessing Officer cannot reopen completed assessments in absence of incriminating material found during search, limiting the scope of assessment to such material and abated pending assessments.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 153A of Income Tax Act, 1961 search under Section 132 assessment of total income incriminating material

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3 v. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd.

24 Apr 2023 · M. R. Shah; Sudhanshu Dhulia

The Supreme Court held that under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, assessments reopening completed assessments require incriminating material found during search; absent such material, no additions can be made.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Section 153A Income Tax Act search and seizure incriminating material completed assessment

Suneetha Narreddy v. Y S Avinash Reddy

24 Apr 2023 · Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud; Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's interim order granting anticipatory bail and restricting investigation procedures in a murder conspiracy case, emphasizing that such directions unduly hamper investigation and extended the investigation deadline.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC murder conspiracy investigation

Rockline Construction Company v. Doha Bank QSC & Ors.

24 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Sanjay Karol

The Supreme Court directed the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal to decide the rate of interest and mesne profits on a refunded auction sale amount expeditiously, rejecting limitation objections and refusing to interfere with prior orders.

civil other Significant auction sale refund interest rate mesne profits

Rockline Construction Company v. Doha Bank QSC & Ors.

24 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Sanjay Karol

The Supreme Court directed the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal to expeditiously decide the pending appeal on the rate of interest and mesne profits payable on the refund of a set-aside auction sale amount, holding that limitation shall not bar the appeal.

civil other Significant rate of interest mesne profits refund of sale amount Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal

Jitendra Kumar Rode v. Union of India

24 Apr 2023 · Sanjay Karol; Krishna Murari

The Supreme Court held that appellate courts cannot uphold convictions without trial court records, emphasizing the accused's right to a fair trial and mandating retrial or reconstruction of lost records.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant trial court records Section 385 CrPC fair trial Article 21

Jitendra Kumar Rode v. Union of India

24 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Sanjay Karol
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court set aside a corruption conviction upheld without trial court records, holding that appellate courts must peruse complete records to ensure fair trial rights under Article 21.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 385 CrPC Article 21 Constitution Loss of trial court record Right to fair trial

Jitendra Kumar Rode v. Union of India

24 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Sanjay Karol
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that conviction cannot be upheld without the trial court record, as it violates the accused's right to a fair trial under Article 21, and remanded the case for fresh trial.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant trial court record appellate procedure Section 385 CrPC Article 21

Jitendra Kumar Rode v. Union of India

24 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Sanjay Karol
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court set aside a corruption conviction upheld without trial court records, holding that appellate courts must peruse complete records under Section 385 CrPC to protect the accused's fundamental rights under Article 21.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 385 CrPC Article 21 Constitution of India loss of trial court records conviction upheld without records

Maghavendra Pratap Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

24 Apr 2023 · B. R. Gavai; Sanjay Karol

The Supreme Court set aside the conviction of Maghavendra Pratap Singh due to insufficient circumstantial evidence and flawed investigation, emphasizing the necessity of a complete chain of evidence and proper proof of criminal conspiracy.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence criminal conspiracy Section 120-B IPC investigating officer duties

Ali Hussain Ishaq Ali Vohra & Ors v. State of Gujarat & Ors

24 Apr 2023 · Krishna Murari; Sanjay Kumar

The Supreme Court held that withdrawal of a writ petition with a prayer for liberty to file afresh permits filing a fresh petition even if the dismissal order does not expressly mention such liberty, and restored the subsequent petition for adjudication on merits.

civil appeal_allowed Significant withdrawal of writ petition liberty to file afresh procedural technicality Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property Act

Dakka Balaram Reddy v. Andhra Pradesh

21 Apr 2023 · Dinesh Maheshwari; Sanjay Kumar

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction and death sentence for murder and robbery, emphasizing limited scope of interference under Article 136 and reliability of eyewitness and seizure evidence.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant murder robbery death sentence eyewitness testimony

Dakkata Balaram Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh

21 Apr 2023 · Dinesh Maheshwari; Sanjay Kumar

The Supreme Court upheld the murder convictions based on circumstantial evidence and possession of stolen property, refusing to interfere with concurrent findings absent manifest illegality.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant circumstantial evidence concurrent findings Article 136 possession of stolen property