Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Allahabad HC Orders GSTN to Modify Portal within 1 Month to Allow Appeals Even When Disputed Tax Shows Nil
 Statement Recorded By High Courts Can't Be Later Contradicted By Counsel : Supreme Court
 Karnataka High Court restrains Bengaluru-based Institute of Chartered Tax Practitioners India from enrolling candidates for its courses
 Attachment on Cash Credit of Assessee under GST Act: Delhi HC directs Bank to Comply Instructions to Vacate
 Income Tax Addition Made Towards Unsubstantiated Share Capital Is Eligible For Section 80-IC Deduction: Delhi High Court
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger

Statement Recorded By High Courts Can't Be Later Contradicted By Counsel : Supreme Court
November, 13th 2025

The Supreme Court has reiterated that High Courts are Courts of Record and that whatever is recorded in their proceedings is presumed to be correct and cannot be contradicted later by parties or counsel.

A Bench comprising Justice Manmohan and Justice N.V. Anjaria made this observation while disposing of a Special Leave Petition filed against an order of the Allahabad High Court dated September 15, 2025.

 the High Court's order, which had set aside an order of the First Appellate Court and granted a temporary injunction based on a statement allegedly made by her counsel. The petitioner argued before the Supreme Court that the concession made by her counsel was unauthorised and contrary to her instructions.

 

Rejecting this argument, the Supreme Court referred to the landmark ruling in State of Maharashtra v. Ramdas Shrinivas Nayak & Anr., (1982) 2 SCC 463, and reiterated that the record of proceedings in the High Court is conclusive.

 “This Court has repeatedly held that the High Courts in India are the Courts of record and what is recorded in the Courts are correct and cannot be contradicted by the counsel for the parties,” the Bench observed.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court disposed of the petition while granting the petitioner liberty to file an appropriate application before the High Court.


Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2026 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting