News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
From the Courts »
 Sanjeev Singh, 861, Sector-9 U.E, Karnal. vs. Pr. CIT, Karnal.
 M/s. Moet Hennessy India Pvt. Ltd., 1903, 19th Floor, India Bulls Finance Centre, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400 013. vs. ACIT, Special Range 6, New Delhi.
 Mohd. Umar, 272, Bani Sarai, Meerut vs. Income Tax Officer Ward – 1 (4), Meerut
 M/s. Superior Portfolio Pvt. Limited, 4663, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, Delhi-110002 vs Income Tax Officer Ward- 24 (4), New Delhi
 PCIT vs. A. A. Estate Pvt. Ltd (Supreme Court)
 Shyamsunder Rao Gone, Manchiryal, ADILABAD Income Tax Officer, Ward-17(3), HYDERABAD
 Shri Nikhil Agarwal, 9/49, 2nd Floor, Punjabi Bagh West, New Delhi. vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-71(2), New Delhi.
 Dharampal Satyapal Ltd, 1711, S. P. Mukherjee Marg, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-29, New Delhi
 Shri Manik Singh, S/o Dr. Meharban Singh, A-47, Sector 31, NOIDA. vs. Dy.C.I.T., Circle-2, Noida.
 Sushila Khandelwal B-88, First Floor Sarvodaya Enclave, New Delhi 110017 vs. Income Tax Officer Ward – 32 (3) New Delhi
 Shri A.K. Aggarwal, H.No.1711, Sector-9 vs. The ACIT, Circle Karnal. Haryana.

2G scam: Unitech Wireless's Chandra says CBI has no evidence against him
September, 07th 2011

Unitech Wireless' Managing Director Sanjay Chandra today told the Supreme Court that the CBI has failed to make out a prima-facie case against him in the 2G scam as it did not have documentary evidence to support the offences mentioned in the charge sheet.

"In this case, there is no prima-facie case at all," his counsel and senior advocate Ram Jethmalani submitted before a bench comprising justices G S Singhvi and H L Dattu.

"There is no document to suggest I have cheated. I have not used any document which is forged. I have not committed any offence under section 420 (cheating) of Indian Penal Code. Throughout the charge sheet ingredients of these sections are not mentioned," he said while submitting that Chandra has been in illegal custody.

Jethmalani said that the businessman was wrongly taken into custody and had to go through the ordeal of approaching the courts for bail which was rejected.

"Even if a prima facie case exists, bail is the rule and denial of it is an exception and exception is based on the record of misuse of liberty granted by courts," the senior advocate said.

He argued that Chandra had no criminal past and had all along cooperated with the CBI during the investigation in the case.

He said by arresting the businessman, not only his liberty has been violated but when a person is arrested, he is virtually "assassinated in the eyes of the society."

Jethmalani said when there were 17 accused in the case, how could Chandra be charged with the offence of conspiracy.

The court was hearing bail pleas of Chandra and Swan Telecom's Director Vinod Goenka. They have alleged that the CBI was acting in a discriminatory and arbitrary manner in the 2G spectrum case.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2019 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Wholesale Silver Jewelry

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions