cites: 1250056

Mahadeolal Kanodia vs The Administrator-General Ofwest ... on 20 April, 1960

18. Depreciating this kind of tendency of some Judge, Das Gupta, J., in Mahadeolal Kanodia v. Administrator General of West Bengal, AIR 1960 SC 936 said (at p. 941):

Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 269 - K C Gupta - Full Document

Article 301 in Constitution of India [Constitution]

Constitution Article Cites 3 - Cited by 1971

Union Of India And Anr vs Paras Laminates (P) Ltd on 17 August, 1990

In Union of India v. Paras Laminated (P) Ltd. 1991 (80) Sales Tax Cases 273, the Bench of two Members of the Tribunal while determining the matter, doubted the correctness of the earlier decision of Bench of three members of the Tribunal in Bakelite Hylams Ltd. v. Collector of Customs (1986) 25 ELT 240 and directed that the case be placed before the President of the Tribunal for referring it to a larger bench. The President referred the case to a larger bench of five members. The High Court struck down the order of the Bench of five members of the tribunal, observing that the Bench of two members ought to have followed the earlier decision of the larger bench of three members and reference of the case to still larger bench was contrary to judicial precedent and judicial discipline. The Supreme Court while dealing with this proposition held :

Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 202 - T K Thommen - Full Document

Bakelite Hylam Ltd. And Anr. vs Collector Of Customs And Anr. on 21 April, 1986

In Union of India v. Paras Laminated (P) Ltd. 1991 (80) Sales Tax Cases 273, the Bench of two Members of the Tribunal while determining the matter, doubted the correctness of the earlier decision of Bench of three members of the Tribunal in Bakelite Hylams Ltd. v. Collector of Customs (1986) 25 ELT 240 and directed that the case be placed before the President of the Tribunal for referring it to a larger bench. The President referred the case to a larger bench of five members. The High Court struck down the order of the Bench of five members of the tribunal, observing that the Bench of two members ought to have followed the earlier decision of the larger bench of three members and reference of the case to still larger bench was contrary to judicial precedent and judicial discipline. The Supreme Court while dealing with this proposition held :

Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 4 - Cited by 12 - Full Document