Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 1059 (3.58 seconds)
Documents citing Union Of India And Others vs Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. on 24 September, 1991

Ajanta Manufacturing Private Limited vs Union Of India on 14 October, 2021

11. Apt would be to refer at this juncture the decision of the Apex Court rendered in case of Union of India vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation LTD., reported in 1991 (55) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.) 11.1 The Apex Court was considering the case where, according to the respondent, the goods manufactured by the petitioner fell under tariff heading 85.47 of the Page 25 of 82 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 17 00:13:14 IST 2022 C/SCA/3320/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/10/2021 scheduled to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Whereas according to the petitioner, the goods fell under heading 39.19 of the same schedule. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise had issued the notice to the respondent manufacturer to show cause as to why the product should not be classified under heading 39.19. The assessee pointed out that for its factory at Borivili, its claim that the goods were classifiable under heading 85.46 had been accepted by the Collector of Appeals. The Assistant Collector, however, did not accept the contention of the assessee and he distinguished the order passed in respect of the Borivili plant.
Gujarat High Court Cites 47 - Cited by 0 - S G Gokani - Full Document

Eagle Flask Industries Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 19 March, 1999

It was further submitted before him that the decision in the case of Suclarshan Chemical Industries Ltd. (supra) was of a binding nature as held in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Kamlakshi Finance Corpn. Ltd. (1992) Suppl (1) SCC 648. The Commissioner (Appeals) was not convinced by the arguments put before him and rejected the appeal of the assessee observing as under. I do not agree with the appellant. The binding nature of the Tribunal's decision is only for that case and not in respect of other cases.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 8 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Eagle Flask Industries Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 19 March, 1999

In the case of Union of India & Ors. vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corpn. Ltd. (supra) which was cited before the authorities below, it has clearly been held that the decisions of higher authorities on the same issue are binding on subordinate authorities and should be followed unreservedly. Though this decision was pronounced under Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 yet it lays down a vital proposition of law. Here we would like to reproduce the operative part of the judgment which reads as under :
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sainath Aviotechnics Pvt Ltd vs Union Of India on 9 February, 2024

In a somewhat identical matter, a Division Bench of this Court in Ganesh Benzoplast Limited Vs. Union of India, 2020 (374) ELT 552 referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Limited (supra) and held that non-compliance to Orders of the appellate authority by the subordinate original authority is disturbing to say the least as it strikes at the very root of administrative discipline 14&15_WPST97994&97997_20.doc and may have the effect of severely undermining the efficacy of the appellate remedy provided to a litigant under the statute. Principles of judicial discipline require that the Orders of the higher appellate authorities should be Page 8 of 10 9th February, 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 23/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2024 01:54:37 ::: 909 WPL34193-23.DOC followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities. In the facts and circumstances of that case, Respondentss were directed to release the goods forthwith and without any delay."
Bombay High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - G S Kulkarni - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next