Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.23 seconds)Sales Tax Officer, Banaras & Others vs Kanhaiya Lal Mukundlal Saraf on 23 September, 1958
Such a direction, as pointed out earlier, cannot be made. Even in cases where the validity of an assessment is challenged and a prayer for a direction for the refund of the tax collected is made, such a direction is not generally made when it involves disputed questions of law and fact. The decisions in Sales Tax Officer. Banaras v. Kanhaiya Lal, AIR 1959 SC 135 and Basheshar Nath v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi and Rajasthan, AIR 1959 SC 149 point out that while considering the question whether a direction for refund of an amount should or should not be made in the exercise of the Court's discretion under Article 226 the Court must have regard to estoppel, acquiescence, limitation, and the like.
Basheshar Nath vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Delhi & ... on 19 November, 1958
Such a direction, as pointed out earlier, cannot be made. Even in cases where the validity of an assessment is challenged and a prayer for a direction for the refund of the tax collected is made, such a direction is not generally made when it involves disputed questions of law and fact. The decisions in Sales Tax Officer. Banaras v. Kanhaiya Lal, AIR 1959 SC 135 and Basheshar Nath v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi and Rajasthan, AIR 1959 SC 149 point out that while considering the question whether a direction for refund of an amount should or should not be made in the exercise of the Court's discretion under Article 226 the Court must have regard to estoppel, acquiescence, limitation, and the like.
The Specific Relief Act, 1963
Kesho Prasad Singh vs The Board Of Revenue on 2 March, 1911
In this connexion it would be sufficient to refer to a decision of the Calcutta High Court in Kesho Prasad Singh v. Board of Revenue, ILR 38 Cal 553. That was a case where the plaintiff had obtained a decree for recovery of possession of an estate against an infant under the Court of Wards.
1