Category: Allied Laws

Archive for the ‘Allied Laws’ Category


CCE, Mumbai v. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. 2015 (315) ELT 161 (SC)

Central Excise Act, 1944.
Precedent – Judicial discipline – Conflicting decisions by CESTAT Benches – Appropriate Course for the second Bench is to refer the matter to the Larger Bench- Court directed the President to constitute a larger bench of three Members to decide the issue.

New Medical (Agartala) Pvt. Ltd. v. Superintendent of Taxes, Charge-VI, Agartala & Ors. (2015) 82 VST 238 (Tripura) (HC).

Tripura Value Added Tax Act 2004,
S.71:Appellate Tribunal – Registrar cannot refuse to accept the appeal though not maintainable – Order of Non-Maintainability to be passed by the Tribunal itself and not the registrar even if the petition was prima facie not maintainable.

Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors AIR 2013 SC 58/ (2013) 4 SCC 465

Evidence Act ,1872
S.3 : Natural Justice – Right of cross examination – Is integral part of Natural justice though not provided under the statute – Affidavit of own is not evidence with in meaning of S. 3 of the Evidence Act , 1872 .

Vimaleshwar Nagappa Shet v. Noor Ahmed Sheriff & Ors. AIR 2011 SC 2057

Code of Civil Procedure , 1908
S.96: Concession made by counsel on facts – Binds his client – No appeal lies from a decree passed by the court with the consent of the parties. [Constitution of India , 1949, Art .136 ]

New Medical (Agartala) Pvt. Ltd. v. Superintendent of Taxes, Charge-VI, Agartala & Ors. (2015) 82 VST 238 (Tripura) (HC).

Tripura Value Added Tax Act 2004,
S.71:Appellate Tribunal – Registrar cannot refuse to accept the appeal though not maintainable – Order of Non-Maintainability to be passed by the Tribunal itself and not the registrar even if the petition was prima facie not maintainable.

Payadhi Foods P. Ltd. v. UOI 2015 (325) ELT 705 (Cal.)(HC)

Appellate Tribunal – Early hearing – Application must be considered.
When an application is taken out seeking for an early hearing of the said appeal, the Tribunal ought to have fixed the date but should not have thrown the said application at the threshold that it will be taken up in due course.

Megh Raj Bansal v. CE&SAT (2012) 13 GSTR 75 (P&H)(HC)

Finance Act ,1994
S.73: Appelate Tribunal – Adjournment – Medical certificate not necessary while seeking adjournment on medical ground-Order of Appellate Tribunal is set aside .

CC (Import) Mumbai v. Wartsila India Ltd 2010 (254) ELT 406 (Bom) (HC)

Appellate Tribunal – Natural justice -Reasoned order- Judgement cited but no reference found in the order, nor any discussion with respect to rival submission found in the order- One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made, in other words, a speaking out- Order of Tribunal set aside .

Chandrabhai K. Bhoir & Ors v. Krishna Arjun Bhoir & Ors AIR 2009 SC 1645

Indian Succession Act , 1925
S.302: Order – Probate – Interpretation – Order passed without jurisdiction is nullity- Though the order is passed by consent -Principle of resjudicata does not apply –
The question arose for consideration was in respect of application filed u/s. 302 of the Indian Succession Act 1925.

Uday Shankar Triyar v. Ram Kalewar Prasad Singh & Anr. (2006) 1 SCC 75 (para 15)

Code of Civil procedure Code, 1908 .
S.151: : Appeal- Procedural defects and irregularities which are curable should not be allowed to defeat substantive rights or to cause injustice. [ Rule 4 (2) , Order 3 ]