Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 49 (0.65 seconds)Section 67 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Article 301 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Firm And Illuri Subbayya Chetty And Sons vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 25 January, 1963
the Civil Courts had jurisdiction to examine into cases
where the provisions of the Act had not been complied with,
or the statutory tribunal had not acted in conformity with
the fundamental principles of judicial procedures. These
observations were accepted by this Court in Firm of Illuri
Subbayya Chetty Sow v. The State of Andhra Pradesh(1) and in
Kerala v. Ramaswami Iyer and Sons(2). A passage from the
latter case might be,quoted here
"It is true that even if the jurisdiction of
the civil court is excluded, where the
provisions of the statute have not been
complied with or the statutory tribunal has
not acted in conformity with the fundamental
principles of judicial procedure, the civil
courts have jurisdiction to examine these
cases."
Section 20 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 17 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Raleigh Investment Co., Ltd. vs Governor-General In Council. on 9 April, 1943
The Special Bench refrained from either accepting the dictum
of Mask & Co.'s case(4) or rejecting it, to the effect that
even if jurisdiction is excluded by a provision making the
decision of the authorities final, the Civil Courts have
jurisdiction to examine into
(1) [1947] L.R. 741. A.50.
K. S. Venkataraman & Co vs State Of Madras on 18 October, 1965
It was directly covered by the decision of this
Court in Venkataraman's case ( 2 ) read with Circo's Coffee
Co.(2) and Senthulnathan Chettiar's case(2) already referred
to We would have considered this matter again if
Venkataraman's case (2 ) had been doubted before but it
seems to have been followed in the last mentioned case and
Pabbojan Tea Company's case(5).