Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (3) TMI 658 - DELHI HIGH COURT

2016 (3) TMI 658 - DELHI HIGH COURT - TMI - Seeking prohibition in continuing the proceedings by Settlement Commission - Order reserved without giving opportunity of hearing to changed counsel of petitioner - Departure from the rules of natural justice - Held that:- it is not possible for this Court to enquire, at this stage, into whether the Petitioners were denied a hearing by the Settlement Commission. Moreover, the question of the Settlement Commission becoming a party to these proceedings t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt : None ORDER CM APPL 8261/2016 (exemption) in W.P. (C) 1926/2016 CM APPL 8265/2016 (exemption) in W.P. (C) 1928/2016 1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. 2. The applications are disposed of. W.P. (C) 1926/2016 & CM APPL 8260/2016 (for stay) W.P. (C) 1928/2016 & CM APPL 8264/2016 (for stay) 3. These are two writ petitions seeking writ of prohibition to Respondent No. 3, Customs and Central Excise, Settlement Commission, Principal Bench, New Delhi ( Settlement Commission .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ers. 5. The grievance is that the legitimate request for an adjournment to hear the changed counsel for the Petitioners in the aforementioned applications was not acceded to by the Settlement Commission and while only taking on record the written submissions of the Respondents, and without hearing the Petitioners, orders were reserved by the Settlement Commission. 6. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in S. Govinda Menon v. The Union of India (1967) 2 SCR 566 to urge that a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

In the considered view of this Court, these petitions are pre-mature. With the orders having been reserved in the aforementioned applications, what the decision of the Settlement Commission thereon might be is clearly in the realm of speculation at this stage. The decision in S. Govinda Menon v. The Union of India (supra) crystallized the settled legal position as to when a writ of prohibition might issue as under: "The jurisdiction for grant of a writ of prohibition is primarily supervisor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version