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

2016 (7) TMI 1061 - DELHI HIGH COURT

2016 (7) TMI 1061 - DELHI HIGH COURT - 2016 (338) E.L.T. 668 (Del.) - Validity of draft order passed by the Joint Secretary ('JS') Government of India - Order was not singed by the JS who passed the order - Held that:- As far as present case is concerned, the result is that there is no valid order passed on the Petitioner's revision application till date. The draft order dated 20th August 2002 which has no legal status, cannot be held to be a valid order disposing of the Petitioner's revision ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

:p> Petitioner Through Mr. J.S. Sinha with Mr. M.P. Sahay, Advs. Respondents Through Mr. Kamal Kant Jha, Sr. Panel Counsel with Mr. A.K. Bhan, for R-1 Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Adv. for respondents 2 & 3. O R D E R 1. The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 20th August 2002 passed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, rejecting the revision application filed by the petitioner under Section 129D .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lowing order passed by the Court on 4th April 2016: 2. Counsel for the Petitioner points out that in the rejoinder the Petitioner raised the point that the impugned order No. 277/2002 dated 20th' August 2002 passed by Mr Dinesh Kacker, the Joint Secretary (JS) to the Government of India, in the Department of Revenue, was in fact not signed by the said JS. He states that this fact can be verified only if the original file (being F. No. 375/3 l/DBK/2001-RA.Cus) in which the order w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

left hand corner of the fitrst page of the Draft Order. Also numerous corrections made in the Draft Order have not been initialled by him. 6. What is important is that the impugned order, certified copy of which has been issued to the Petitioner and which has been assailed in the present petition, is present in the file but without the signature of Mr. Kakkar. The end of the order only states sd/- with the name of Mr. Dinesh Kakkar typed below. Below this to the left is the attestati .....

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