Search Results Page

Search Results

21 - 30 of 141 (2.22 seconds)
Documents citing Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. vs State Of Haryana And Anr. on 25 August, 1998

Anr vs The Kolkata Municipal on 18 September, 2025

8. That apart, we may also usefully refer to the decisions of this Court reported in (1977) 2 SCC 724 (State of Uttar Pradesh & ors. vs. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.) and (2000) 10 SCC 482 (Union of India vs. State of Haryana). What appears on a plain reading of the former decision is that whether a certain item falls within an entry in a sales tax statute, raises a pure question of law and if investigation into facts is unnecessary, the high court could entertain a writ petition in its discretion even though the alternative remedy was not availed of; and, unless exercise of discretion is 6 shown to be unreasonable or perverse, this Court would not interfere. In the latter decision, this Court found the issue raised by the appellant to be pristinely legal requiring determination by the high court without putting the appellant through the mill of statutory appeals in the hierarchy. What follows from the said decisions is that where the controversy is a purely legal one and it does not involve disputed questions of fact but only questions of law, then it should be decided by the high court instead of dismissing the writ petition on the ground of an alternative remedy being available.
Calcutta High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Jai Bajrang Walee Stone Works vs The State Of Jharkhand on 16 October, 2025

8. That apart, we may also usefully refer to the decisions of this Court reported in (1977) 2 SCC 724 (State of U. P. v. Indian 24 2025:JHHC:32211-DB Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.)** and (2000) 10 SCC 482 (Union of India v. State of Haryana). What appears on a plain reading of the former decision is that whether a certain item falls within an entry in a sales tax statute, raises a pure question of law and if investigation into facts is unnecessary, the High Court could entertain a writ petition in its discretion even though the alternative remedy was not availed of ; and, unless exercise of discretion is shown to be unreasonable or perverse, this Court would not interfere. In the latter decision, this court found the issue raised by the appellant to be pristinely legal requiring determination by the High Court without putting the appellant through the mill of statutory appeals in the hierarchy. What follows from the said decisions is that where the controversy is a purely legal one and it does not involve disputed questions of fact but only questions of law, then it should be decided by the High Court instead of dismissing the writ petition on the ground of an alternative remedy being available."
Jharkhand High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document

The Executive Officer vs Rama.Ravikumar ...1St on 19 November, 2025

(b)While considering the plea of alternate relief, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in AIR 2023 SCC 781, in M/s.Godrej Sara Lee Ltd., V. Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority and Ors., referring the earlier decisions reported in (1977) 2 SCC 724 (State of Uttar Pradesh & ors. vs. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.) and (2000) 10 SCC 482 (Union of India vs. State of Haryana) has held that:
Madras High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - G Jayachandran - Full Document

Vritpal Sindhu vs Amit Agrawal on 25 April, 2026

8. That apart, we may also usefully refer to the decisions of this Court reported in (1977) 2 SCC 724 (State of U. P. v. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.)** and (2000) 10 SCC 482 (Union of India v. State of Haryana). What appears on a plain reading of the former decision is that whether a certain item falls within an entry in a sales tax statute, raises a pure question of law and if investigation into facts is unnecessary, the High Court could entertain a writ petition in its discretion even though the alternative remedy was not availed of ; and, unless exercise of discretion is shown to be unreasonable or perverse, this Court would not interfere. In the latter decision, this court found the issue raised by the appellant to be pristinely legal requiring determination by the High Court without putting the appellant through the mill of statutory appeals in the hierarchy. What follows from the said decisions is that where the controversy is a purely legal one and it does not * (2021) 93 GSTR 1 (SC). ** (1977) 39 STC 355 (SC) involve disputed questions of fact but only questions of law, then it should be decided by the High Court instead of dismissing the writ petition on the ground of an alternative remedy being available.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Gr Infraprojects Limited vs Union Of India on 17 March, 2025

Union of India, (1990) 1 SCC 613 (Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster Case) and C. B. Gautam v. Union of India, (1993) 1 SCC 78, the doctrine that the principles (Downloaded on 28/03/2025 at 10:33:57 PM) (8 of 9) [CW-13628/2024] of natural justice must be applied in the unoccupied interstices of the statute unless there is a clear mandate to the contrary, is reiterated."
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - P S Bhati - Full Document

Vritpal Sindhu vs Prateek Agrawal on 25 April, 2026

8. That apart, we may also usefully refer to the decisions of this Court reported in (1977) 2 SCC 724 (State of U. P. v. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.)** and (2000) 10 SCC 482 (Union of India v. State of Haryana). What appears on a plain reading of the former decision is that whether a certain item falls within an entry in a sales tax statute, raises a pure question of law and if investigation into facts is unnecessary, the High Court could entertain a writ petition in its discretion even though the alternative remedy was not availed of ; and, unless exercise of discretion is shown to be unreasonable or perverse, this Court would not interfere. In the latter decision, this court found the issue raised by the appellant to be pristinely legal requiring determination by the High Court without putting the appellant through the mill of statutory appeals in the hierarchy. What follows from the said decisions is that where the controversy is a purely legal one and it does not * (2021) 93 GSTR 1 (SC). ** (1977) 39 STC 355 (SC) involve disputed questions of fact but only questions of law, then it should be decided by the High Court instead of dismissing the writ petition on the ground of an alternative remedy being available.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Merlin Projects Limited vs Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 12 June, 2025

"8. That apart, we may also usefully refer to the decisions of this Court reported in (1977) 2 SCC 724 (State of U. P. v. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.)** and (2000) 10 SCC 482 (Union of India v. State of Haryana). What appears on a plain reading of the former decision is that whether a certain item falls within an entry in a sales tax statute, raises a pure question of law and if investigation into facts is unnecessary, the High Court could entertain a writ petition in its discretion even though the alternative remedy was not availed of ; and, unless exercise of discretion is shown to be unreasonable or perverse, this Court would not interfere. In the latter decision, this court found the issue raised by the appellant to be pristinely legal requiring determination by the High Court without putting the appellant through the mill of statutory appeals in the hierarchy. What follows from the said decision is that where the controversy is a purely legal one and it does not *(2021) 93 GSTR 1 (SC) ** (1977) 39 STC 355 (SC).
Calcutta High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Merlin Projects Limited vs Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 12 June, 2025

"8. That apart, we may also usefully refer to the decisions of this Court reported in (1977) 2 SCC 724 (State of U. P. v. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.)** and (2000) 10 SCC 482 (Union of India v. State of Haryana). What appears on a plain reading of the former decision is that whether a certain item falls within an entry in a sales tax statute, raises a pure question of law and if investigation into facts is unnecessary, the High Court could entertain a writ petition in its discretion even though the alternative remedy was not availed of ; and, unless exercise of discretion is shown to be unreasonable or perverse, this Court would not interfere. In the latter decision, this court found the issue raised by the appellant to be pristinely legal requiring determination by the High Court without putting the appellant through the mill of statutory appeals in the hierarchy. What follows from the said decision is that where the controversy is a purely legal one and it does not *(2021) 93 GSTR 1 (SC) ** (1977) 39 STC 355 (SC).
Calcutta High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Merlin Projects Limited vs Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 12 June, 2025

"8. That apart, we may also usefully refer to the decisions of this Court reported in (1977) 2 SCC 724 (State of U. P. v. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.)** and (2000) 10 SCC 482 (Union of India v. State of Haryana). What appears on a plain reading of the former decision is that whether a certain item falls within an entry in a sales tax statute, raises a pure question of law and if investigation into facts is unnecessary, the High Court could entertain a writ petition in its discretion even though the alternative remedy was not availed of ; and, unless exercise of discretion is shown to be unreasonable or perverse, this Court would not interfere. In the latter decision, this court found the issue raised by the appellant to be pristinely legal requiring determination by the High Court without putting the appellant through the mill of statutory appeals in the hierarchy. What follows from the said decision is that where the controversy is a purely legal one and it does not *(2021) 93 GSTR 1 (SC) ** (1977) 39 STC 355 (SC).
Calcutta High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Merlin Projects Limited vs Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 12 June, 2025

"8. That apart, we may also usefully refer to the decisions of this Court reported in (1977) 2 SCC 724 (State of U. P. v. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.)** and (2000) 10 SCC 482 (Union of India v. State of Haryana). What appears on a plain reading of the former decision is that whether a certain item falls within an entry in a sales tax statute, raises a pure question of law and if investigation into facts is unnecessary, the High Court could entertain a writ petition in its discretion even though the alternative remedy was not availed of ; and, unless exercise of discretion is shown to be unreasonable or perverse, this Court would not interfere. In the latter decision, this court found the issue raised by the appellant to be pristinely legal requiring determination by the High Court without putting the appellant through the mill of statutory appeals in the hierarchy. What follows from the said decision is that where the controversy is a purely legal one and it does not *(2021) 93 GSTR 1 (SC) ** (1977) 39 STC 355 (SC).
Calcutta High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
Previous   1 2 3   4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next