Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.21 seconds)

Assistant Commissioner (Ct) Ltu ... vs M/S Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health ... on 6 May, 2020

6. Though the impugned order is dated 21.12.2022, the W.P.No.22293 of 2023 was filed only on 25.07.2023. As per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited case (referred to supra), a writ petition beyond the statutory period of limitation is ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 4 of 17 W.P.No.22293, 22299 and 22302 of 2023 liable to be dismissed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 49 - Cited by 100 - A M Khanwilkar - Full Document

Electronics Corporation Of India Ltd vs Electronics Corporation Of India ... on 21 August, 2006

19. We may now revert to the Full Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Electronics Corpn. of India Ltd. [Electronics Corpn. of India Ltd. v. Union of India, 2018 SCC Online Hyd 21 : (2018) 361 ELT 22], which had adopted the view taken by the Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Panoli Intermediate (India) (P) Ltd.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 124 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Panoli Intermediate (India) Pvt Ltd vs Union Of India & 2 on 13 March, 2015

v. Union of India [Panoli Intermediate (India) (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, 2015 SCC Online Guj 570 : AIR 2015 Guj 97] and also of the Karnataka High Court in Phoenix Plasts Co. v. CCE [Phoenix Plasts Co. v. CCE, 2013 SCC Online Kar 10432 : (2013) 298 ELT 481]. The logic applied in these decisions proceeds on fallacious premise. For, these decisions are premised on the logic that provision such as Section 31 of the 2005 Act, cannot curtail the jurisdiction of the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. This approach is faulty. It is not a matter of taking away the jurisdiction of the High Court. In a given ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 7 of 17 W.P.No.22293, 22299 and 22302 of 2023 case, the assessee may approach the High Court before the statutory period of appeal expires to challenge the assessment order by way of writ petition on the ground that the same is without jurisdiction or passed in excess of jurisdiction - by overstepping or crossing the limits of jurisdiction including in flagrant disregard of law and rules of procedure or in violation of principles of natural justice, where no procedure is specified. The High Court may accede to such a challenge and can also non-suit the petitioner on the ground that alternative efficacious remedy is available and that be invoked by the writ petitioner. However, if the writ petitioner choses to approach the High Court after expiry of the maximum limitation period of 60 days prescribed under Section 31 of the 2005 Act, the High Court cannot disregard the statutory period for redressal of the grievance and entertain the writ petition of such a party as a matter of course.
Gujarat High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 53 - Full Document
1