Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD AND R.V.K. JAIN Versus NION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2016 (8) TMI 125 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Waiver of pre-deposit - Constitutional validity of amendment made in Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - retrospective or prospective - Held that:- so far as question pertaining to Constitutional validity of the amendment and its retrospective effect or prospective effect are concerned, since such questions are not examined by us, liberty can be reserved to raise such issues at a later stage, in the event the appellants are unsatisfied with the decision of the Tribunal. We find that we .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. - WRIT APPEAL NO.4856/2015(T-TAR) AND WRIT APPEAL NO.836/2016 - Dated:- 28-6-2016 - MR. JAYANT PATEL AND MR. B.SREENIVASE GOWDA, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : SRI. G. SHIVADASS, ADV. FOR THE RESPONDENT : SRI. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, SR. CGSC ORDER Both the appeals are directed against the order dated 7th October, 2015, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in dismissing the petitions, whereby the learned Single Judge for the reasons .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ppellants had submitted that, one of the appellant concerned in W.A.No.4856/2015 is ready to deposit the amount of 7.5% and this Court may consider the same for dispensing with the recovery from the concerned Officer. In view of the said declaration, the notice was issued and today we have also heard Mr. Neeralgi, the learned Counsel for the respondents. 4. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that as there is already alternative forum of appeal available and already resorted to again .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

llant, Company in the present matter, is ready to deposit 7.5% of the requisite amount of penalty and since penalty is also imposed on the officer, the same if is dispensed with by this Court in exercise of the power under Article 226 of the Constitution, the appellant may not press the challenge to the validity of the amendment made to Section 35F of the Act at this stage, reserving liberty to challenge the same before Division Bench of this Court, in the event they are unsatisfied with the dec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e may record that the quantum of penalty imposed upon the appellant - Company is of ₹ 6 crores and 7.5% of the said amount would come to ₹ 45 lakhs. Whereas, so far as the Officer of the appellant - Company, namely appellant No.2 is concerned, the penalty imposed is of ₹ 50 lakhs and 7.5% thereof may come to ₹ 3.75 lakhs. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears to us that if the appellant is relegated to pursue the appeal before the appellate autho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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