Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.22 seconds)
Dhanani Shoes Ltd. And Anr. vs State Of Assam And Ors. on 11 April, 2008 cites

Calcutta Discount Company Limited vs Income-Tax Officer, Companies ... on 1 November, 1960

33. In other words, since it is the case of the writ petitioners that the conditions precedent for exercise of power of seizure of the books of account, etc., and also the conditions precedent for exercise of power of seizure of the goods had not been satisfied before the seizures in question took place, it logically follows that the petitioners challenge the seizures as being without jurisdiction and without authority of law. In such circumstances, existence of alternative remedy, if any, cannot be treated to be an absolute bar to the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction by the High Court under Article 226. This has been the consistent position of law and it is in this light that the decision of the Constitution Bench, in Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, Companies District I, Calcutta , needs to be construed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 1681 - K C Gupta - Full Document

State Of H.P. And Ors vs Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. And Anr on 18 July, 2005

10. Controverting the above submissions, made on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Saikia has raised two preliminary objections to the maintainability of the writ petition. In this regard, Mr. Saikia submits that though no provision for appeal has been made in the Act against seizure of books of account, etc., and also as regard seizure of stock of goods, Section 82 of the Act does make provisions for revision against such seizure. Since the seizures, made in the present case, are, according to Mr. Saikia, subject to the power of revision under Section 82, there is an alternative and efficacious remedy available to the petitioners and, hence, in such circumstances, writ jurisdiction has been wrongly sought to be invoked by the petitioners. Support for these submissions is sought to be derived by Mr. Saikia from the cases of State of H.P. v. Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. , Union of India v. Hindalco Industries and Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal v. Dunlop India Ltd. .
Supreme Court of India Cites 52 - Cited by 583 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Assistant Collector Of Central Excise ... vs Dunlop India Ltd. And Ors on 30 November, 1984

10. Controverting the above submissions, made on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Saikia has raised two preliminary objections to the maintainability of the writ petition. In this regard, Mr. Saikia submits that though no provision for appeal has been made in the Act against seizure of books of account, etc., and also as regard seizure of stock of goods, Section 82 of the Act does make provisions for revision against such seizure. Since the seizures, made in the present case, are, according to Mr. Saikia, subject to the power of revision under Section 82, there is an alternative and efficacious remedy available to the petitioners and, hence, in such circumstances, writ jurisdiction has been wrongly sought to be invoked by the petitioners. Support for these submissions is sought to be derived by Mr. Saikia from the cases of State of H.P. v. Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. , Union of India v. Hindalco Industries and Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal v. Dunlop India Ltd. .
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 971 - O C Reddy - Full Document

Assistant Collector Of Central ... vs National Tobacco Co. Of India Ltd on 9 August, 1972

In Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta v. National Tobacco Co. of India Ltd. , a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, while reacting to the question as to whether the Collector, who had issued the impugned notice, did or did not have the authority under the relevant rules, reacted by observing that such a question, i.e., a question as to whether the authority, which issues a notice, has or does not have any authority of law is a question of jurisdiction and when such a question goes to the root of the case and when such a question can be decided without taking further evidence, a writ petition under article 226 can be entertained.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 342 - M H Beg - Full Document

Whirlpool Corporation vs Registrar Of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors on 26 October, 1998

31. From what have been observed and laid down in Whirlpool Corporation , it becomes clear that an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the exercise of jurisdiction, under Article 226, in, at least, three contingencies, namely, (i) where the writ petition has been filed for the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights, or (ii) where there has been a violation of the principles of natural justice, or (iii) where the order or proceeding is wholly without jurisdiction or where the vires of an enactment is under challenge.
Supreme Court of India Cites 45 - Cited by 2032 - S S Ahmad - Full Document

Union Carbide (India) Ltd. vs Assistant Collector Of Central Excise on 15 March, 1984

10. Controverting the above submissions, made on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Saikia has raised two preliminary objections to the maintainability of the writ petition. In this regard, Mr. Saikia submits that though no provision for appeal has been made in the Act against seizure of books of account, etc., and also as regard seizure of stock of goods, Section 82 of the Act does make provisions for revision against such seizure. Since the seizures, made in the present case, are, according to Mr. Saikia, subject to the power of revision under Section 82, there is an alternative and efficacious remedy available to the petitioners and, hence, in such circumstances, writ jurisdiction has been wrongly sought to be invoked by the petitioners. Support for these submissions is sought to be derived by Mr. Saikia from the cases of State of H.P. v. Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. , Union of India v. Hindalco Industries and Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal v. Dunlop India Ltd. .
Calcutta High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 6 - Full Document
1