Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (3.73 seconds)The Central Excise Act, 1944
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Jyotendrasinhji vs S.I. Tripathi And Ors on 2 April, 1993
25. As observed by the Apex Court in the case of Jyotendrasinghji
Vs. Tripathi the writ court is entitled to know the process of adjudication by
the Settlement Commission determining the contentions raised by the
parties. In the absence of reasons, it is not possible for this court to read the
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 16:15:56 :::
10
mind of the Settlement Commission. In these circumstances, the order of the
Settlement Commission to the extent it rejects the submission advanced by
the Petitioner is liable to be rejected. The Settlement Commission was
expected to record reasons. Thus the impugned order being in breach of
principles of natural justice, we have no option but to set aside the same to
the extent it has determined the duty liability of the Petitioner and the
proceedings are remanded back to the Settlement Commission for
consideration afresh. All rival contentions of the parties on the issue are kept
open. The Settlement Commission is expected to pass a reasoned order
following the principles of natural justice dealing with all the contentions of
the parties with expeditious dispatch at any rate within the period of three
months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Section 4 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
M. Krishna Swami vs Union Of India & Ors on 27 August, 1992
Krishna Swami Vs. Union of India & Ors. AIR 1993 SC 1407) .
M/S Amrit Agro Industries Ltd. & Anr vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 19 March, 2007
15. Mr. Pardeshi further urged that the issue relating to cum duty
dealt with in the case of Maruti was discussed and explained by the Apex
Court in the subsequent Judgment in the case of Amrit Agro Industries
Ltd. Vs. CCE reported in 2007 210 ELT 183 SC, wherein the Apex Court
observed that in absence of payment of duty the question of abatement
under Section 4(4)(d)(ii) of CEA 1944 does not arise.
Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985
Section 3 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
State Of West Bengal vs Atul Krishna Shaw And Anr on 28 August, 1990
In State of West Bengal Vs. Atul Krishna Shaw & Anr. AIR 1990 SC
2205, this Court observed that "giving of reasons is an essential element of
administration of justice. A right to reason is, therefore, an indispensable part
of sound system of judicial review."