Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 75 (0.89 seconds)
Documents citing Union Of India vs M/S Guwahati Carbon Ltd on 24 July, 2018

Union Of India vs Coastal Container Transporters ... on 26 February, 2019

19. On the other hand, we find force in the contention of the learned senior counsel, Sri Radhakrishnan, appearing for the appellants that the High Court has committed error in entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India at the stage of show cause notices. Though there is no bar as such for entertaining the writ petitions at the stage of show cause notice, but it is settled by number of decisions of this Court, where writ petitions can be entertained at 19 C.A.@ SLP(C)No.25699/18 the show cause notice stage. Neither it is a case of lack of jurisdiction nor any violation of principles of natural justice is alleged so as to entertain the writ petition at the stage of notice. High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition, more so, when against the final orders appeal lies to this Court. The judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India & Anr. v. Guwahati Carbon Ltd. (supra) relied on by the learned senior counsel for the appellants also supports their case. In the aforesaid judgment, arising out of Central Excise Act, 1944, this Court has held that excise law is a complete code in order to seek redress in excise matters and held that entertaining writ petition is not proper where alternative remedy under statute is available. When there is a serious dispute with regard to classification of service, the respondents ought to have responded to the show cause notices by placing material in support of their stand but at the same time, there is no reason to approach the High Court questioning the very show cause notices. Further, as held by the High Court, it cannot be said that even from the contents of show cause notices there are no factual disputes.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 46 - R S Reddy - Full Document

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

It was in this very background that we had in our order dated 20-6- 2012, following the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India v. Guwahati Carbon Ltd. (supra), non-suited the petitioners. The petitioners had approached in writ petitions challenging the decision of the Tribunal which looking to the controversy involved, was appealable before the Supreme Court. We, therefore, came to the conclusion that ordinarily though it may be open for the High Court to by-pass appellate remedy and entertain the writ petition directly ignoring such alternative remedy available, in the present case, petitioners must take the appeal route.
Gujarat High Court Cites 47 - Cited by 0 - S G Gokani - Full Document

Sahitya Mudranalaya Private Limited ... vs Additional Director General on 29 January, 2020

5.5 It was further submitted that the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Guwahati Carbon Limited (supra), would also not be applicable to the facts of the present case inasmuch as in that case, the writ petition sought to challenge the assessment order. Since, a statutory appeal against the order of the Appellate Tribunal in proceedings arising from such order, lay before the Supreme Court, it was held that the writ petition ought not to have been entertained.
Gujarat High Court Cites 58 - Cited by 1 - H Devani - Full Document

M/S Balrampur Chini Mills Ltd. Through ... vs Union Of India , Ministry Of Finance ... on 12 April, 2019

All the said judgements are distinguishable on the facts inasmuch as they had approached the High Court under the writ jurisdiction after passing of the order by the competent authority without approaching the appellate authority, and in the circumstances the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Guwahati Carbon Ltd (supra) has held that the assessee has a remedy in the form of a right to appeal under the statute, that remedy must be exhausted first, and the High Court ought not to have interfered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Allahabad High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

M/S New Era Trading Pvt Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Customs Export & ... on 21 January, 2021

For example in Union of India v. Guwahat W.P.(C) 842/2021 Page 8 of 10 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ KUMAR Location: Signing Date:09.02.2021 22:53:21 Carbon Ltd., it was concluded; "The Excise Law is a complete code in order to seek redress in excise matters and hence may not be appropriate for the writ court to entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution", while in Malladi Drugs & Pharma Ltd. v. Union of India, it was observed:
Delhi High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - J Singh - Full Document

Nr.Chandrasekaran vs The Assistant Commissioner on 26 November, 2021

'19. On the other hand, we find force in the contention of the learned senior counsel, Sri Radhakrishnan, appearing for the appellants that the High Court has committed error in entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India at the stage of show cause notices. Though there is no bar as such for entertaining the writ petitions at the stage of show cause notice, but it is settled by number of decisions of this Court, where writ petitions can be entertained at the show cause notice stage. Neither it is a case of lack of jurisdiction nor any violation of principles of natural justice is alleged so as to entertain the writ petition at the stage of notice. High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition, more so, when against the final orders appeal lies to this Court. The https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 11/20 W.P.(MD)Nos.21081 and 21082 of 2021 judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India & Anr. v. Guwahati Carbon Ltd. (supra) relied on by the learned senior counsel for the appellants also supports their case. In the aforesaid judgment, arising out of Central Excise Act, 1944, this Court has held that excise law is a complete code in order to seek redress in excise matters and held that entertaining writ petition is not proper where alternative remedy under statute is available. When there is a serious dispute with regard to classification of service, the respondents ought to have responded to the show cause notices by placing material in support of their stand but at the same time, there is no reason to approach the High Court questioning the very show cause notices. Further, as held by the High Court, it cannot be said that even from the contents of show cause notices there are no factual disputes.
Madras High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - M Sundar - Full Document

Nr.Chandrasekaran vs The Assistant Commissioner on 26 November, 2021

'19. On the other hand, we find force in the contention of the learned senior counsel, Sri Radhakrishnan, appearing for the appellants that the High Court has committed error in entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India at the stage of show cause notices. Though there is no bar as such for entertaining the writ petitions at the stage of show cause notice, but it is settled by number of decisions of this Court, where writ petitions can be entertained at the show cause notice stage. Neither it is a case of lack of jurisdiction nor any violation of principles of natural justice is alleged so as to entertain the writ petition at the stage of notice. High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition, more so, when against the final orders appeal lies to this Court. The 11/20 W.P.(MD)Nos.21081 and 21082 of 2021 judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India & Anr. v. Guwahati Carbon Ltd. (supra) relied on by the learned senior counsel for the appellants also supports their case. In the aforesaid judgment, arising out of Central Excise Act, 1944, this Court has held that excise law is a complete code in order to seek redress in excise matters and held that entertaining writ petition is not proper where alternative remedy under statute is available. When there is a serious dispute with regard to classification of service, the respondents ought to have responded to the show cause notices by placing material in support of their stand but at the same time, there is no reason to approach the High Court questioning the very show cause notices. Further, as held by the High Court, it cannot be said that even from the contents of show cause notices there are no factual disputes.
Madras High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - M Sundar - Full Document

Goswami Madam vs The Joint Commissioner on 23 November, 2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD) No.2357 of 2013 Though there is no bar as such for entertaining the writ petitions at the stage of show cause notice, but it is settled by number of decisions of this Court, where writ petitions can be entertained at the show cause notice stage. Neither it is a case of lack of jurisdiction nor any violation of principles of natural justice is alleged so as to entertain the writ petition at the stage of notice. High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition, more so, when against the final orders appeal lies to this Court. The judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India & Anr. v. Guwahati Carbon Ltd. (supra) relied on by the learned senior counsel for the appellants also supports their case. In the aforesaid judgment, arising out of Central Excise Act, 1944, this Court has held that excise law is a complete code in order to seek redress in excise matters and held that entertaining writ petition is not proper where alternative remedy under statute is available. When there is a serious dispute with regard to classification of service, the respondents ought to have responded to the show cause notices by placing material in support of their stand but at the same time, there is no reason to approach the High Court questioning the very show cause notices. Further, as held by the High Court, it cannot be said that even from the contents of show cause notices there are no factual disputes.
Madras High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - M Sundar - Full Document

Aban Offshore Ltd. And Anr vs Union Of India And 2 Ors on 6 April, 2022

(c) Secondly, it has been pleaded that the petitioners have disputed facts which are recorded in the impugned order. This, according to the respondents 1 and 2, necessitates adjudication of disputed questions of fact, which cannot be had in writ jurisdiction. It has also been pleaded that a writ court does not function as an appellate court while exercising the power of judicial review. Reference has been made to the decision in Union of India vs. Guwahati Carbon Ltd.5, in this regard.
Bombay High Court Cites 53 - Cited by 0 - D Datta - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next