Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

S P BHARUCHA

333 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 201–333.

SARDAR SINGHversusDEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AGRA CAMP, MA THURA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 24312 July 1994Appeal(s) allowed

Girwar Singh, a large zamindar, died leaving agricultural and other property, leading to multiple testamentary suits and a pending civil suit over the non‑agricultural portion. While the civil suit was pending, consolidation proceedings under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 were initiated, and the civil su

THE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BARODAversusM/S. THE GAEKWAR MILLS LTD.

1996 INSC 118211 October 1996Dismissed

Gaekwar Mills Ltd manufactured a fabric consisting of 33% polyester, 32% viscose and 35% cotton. The Collector of Central Excise argued that the fabric should be classified as a cotton fabric under Item 19 of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, while the CEGAT held that it fell under Item 22 for man‑made fabrics. The S

PRATIBHA PROCESSORS AND ORS., ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 119311 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, Pratibha Processors and others, imported polyester filament yarn under an Open General Licence, warehoused the goods and later obtained an Advance Licence under the Duty‑Exemption Entitlement Certificate (DEEC) scheme, clearing the goods with nil duty. The Customs authorities, however, assessed the Bil

M/S. GUJARAT MACHINERY MANUFACTURERS LTD.versusCOLLECTOR, CENTRAL EXCISE, BARODA.

1996 INSC 103911 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent transferee-company sought sanction of a scheme of amalgamation with the transferor-company. The appellant, a shareholder, objected on grounds of non-disclosure of director's interest, unfairness to minority, and unfair exchange ratio. The High Court sanctioned the scheme, and the Division Bench confirmed

COOCH BEHAR CONTRACTORS' ASSOCIATION AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 104011 September 1996Dismissed

The appellants, contractors engaged in civil construction works for government departments, were assessed under Section 6‑D of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. They challenged the assessment on four grounds: denial of declaration forms allegedly violating Article 14, inclusion of the value of stores and materi

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE ETC. ETC.versusDAI ICHI KARKARIA LTD. ETC. ETC.

1999 INSC 31811 August 1999Dismissed

The manufacturers purchased raw material and used it to make an intermediate product, which was then used to produce a final excisable product. The issue was whether the excise duty paid on the raw material, which could be claimed as credit under the MODVAT scheme, should be deducted from the raw material’s price when

SONIC ELECTROCHEM AND ANR.versusSALES TAX OFFICER AND ORS.

1998 INSC 30111 August 1998Dismissed

Sonic Electrochem, the manufacturer of JET‑MAT, challenged the classification of its product as a "mosquito repellent" under Entry 129 of Schedule II Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, arguing that the product is an insecticide and should enjoy the partial exemption provided under Entry 98. The High Court had d

COLLECTORS OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAYversusM?S GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD.

2000 INSC 31711 May 2000Dismissed

The respondent imported four cases of hydrochloric acid synthesis unit combustion chambers, claiming classification under Heading 84.17(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as machinery and plant. The Assistant Collector classified them under Heading 68.01/16(1) (articles of stone, plaster, etc.), but the Collector (Appe

HYDERABAD INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 23411 May 1999Disposed off

Hyderabad Industries Ltd. and another imported asbestos fibre before 1986 and were demanded additional customs duty under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The appellants argued that the fibre, obtained by merely separating it from the parent rock, was not a manufactured article and therefore not liable to

K.M SHARMAversusINCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 13 (7) NEW DELHI

2002 INSC 19011 April 2002Appeal(s) allowed

K.M. Sharma received compensation and interest for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. The Income Tax Department issued reassessment notices under Section 148 for assessment years 1968-69 to 1971-72 and 1981-82, alleging tax on the interest received. Sharma contended that the reassessments were barred by the

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX TRIVANDRUMversusRELISH GOODS

1999 INSC 9811 March 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Relish Goods bought raw shrimps, peeled and froze them, and claimed a deduction under Section 80HH of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961, asserting that its activity amounted to production by an industrial undertaking. The Income‑Tax Officer rejected the claim, but the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Income‑Tax Appellate Tribunal

M/S. BIRLA CORPORATION LTD.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

1999 INSC 9911 March 1999Dismissed

Birla Corporation Ltd., a cement manufacturer, bought dumpers in Tamil Nadu and paid tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. When the dumpers entered Rajasthan, the state demanded entry tax under the Rajasthan Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles Into Local Areas Act, 1988. The assessee sought a rebate under Section 4(2)

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusCOLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY

2000 INSC 1311 January 2000Dismissed

State Bank of India (SBI) imported computer software and manuals from Ireland and paid customs duty on the full invoice value of US$4,084,475. SBI later claimed a refund, arguing that only the cost of the software for a single site (US$401,047) should be assessable, while the country‑wide licence fee (US$3,683,428) was

RAEES AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1999 INSC 55210 December 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The Nagar Panchayat Jalalabad comprised 21 members, including three nominated members who were barred from voting. A motion of no‑confidence against the President was moved and supported by 13 members. The High Court held that, because the nominated members could not vote, they should be excluded from the total members

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAYversusM/S. HARDIK INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION

1997 INSC 80510 December 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The Collector of Customs, Bombay, seized a shipment of polyethylene scrap imported by M/s Hardik Industrial Corporation after discovering that the material was actually serviceable and ready for use. The Collector ordered the goods to be assessed as serviceable material, enhanced in value, confiscated, and the importer

STATE OF GUJARATversusSUHRID GEIGY LTD. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 145910 December 1996Dismissed

The State of Gujarat issued demand notices for excise duty on Xylocaine and other medicinal preparations containing Xylocaine, invoking the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955. The assessees challenged the notices and the Gujarat High Court quashed them. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whe

M/S APPOLLO TYRES LTD.versusTHE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS AND ANR.

1996 INSC 146010 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Appollo Tyres Ltd., while setting up a tyre manufacturing plant, entered into an agreement with General Tyre International Company to act as its purchasing agent for equipment. The agreement required the appellant to pay a 3% commission on the FOB value of each item procured. Customs assessed duty on the invoice va

B.S. YADIYURAPPAversusMAHALINGAPPA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 49510 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed

B.S. Yadiyurappa filed an election petition in the Karnataka High Court challenging the election of Mahalingappa and named the other two candidates, the Returning Officer and the District Election Commissioner as respondents. The first respondent and the two officials moved to delete their names and sought dismissal of

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.versusM/S. UNIVERSAL EXPORTERS AND ANR.

1997 INSC 64810 September 1997Dismissed

The assessee, M/s Universal Exporters, applied for blank Form III‑A under Rule 12A(5) of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Rules to rebut the presumption of sale to a consumer under Section 3‑AAA of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act. The Sales Tax Officer rejected the application, holding that the transactions were exports of

MRS. R.D. BHATIAversusSMT. RAJINDER KAUR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 101910 September 1996Disposed off

The appellant, an advocate, was suspended for two years by the Bar Council of India on a complaint that she colluded with the opposing party and other lawyers to set aside an ex‑parte decree, allegedly acting as a mediator and misappropriating Rs. 3,500. The disciplinary committee relied on the complainant's affidavit,

M/S. RANADEY MICRONUTRIENTS ETC.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

1996 INSC 102810 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, manufacturers of micronutrients, challenged the classification of their products for excise duty. An earlier Board circular (June 1990) classified micronutrients as "plant growth regulators" under heading 38.08, while a later circular (November 1994) re‑classified them as "other fertilisers" under headi

INDER SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1995 INSC 36010 May 1995Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a habeas corpus petition filed by the relatives of seven men who were allegedly abducted by a Punjab police party led by a Deputy Superintendent of Police on suspicion of involvement in a militant kidnapping. The Court ordered a CBI inquiry, which concluded that the victims were unlawfully

RUPA ASHOK HURRAversusASHOK HURRA AND ANR.

2002 INSC 18910 April 2002Heard

The Supreme Court considered whether a writ petition under Article 32 could be filed to challenge a Supreme Court judgment after a review petition had been dismissed, and whether the Court could correct such a judgment using its inherent powers. It held that a final order of the Supreme Court is not amenable to a writ

OBEROI HOTEL PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

1999 INSC 9210 March 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd. managed several hotels for owners and, under its principal agreement, held an option to purchase the hotel if the owner chose to transfer it. A supplemental agreement in 1975 waived this purchase/right, entitling Oberoi to a fixed compensation upon the hotel's sale. The company received Rs 29,47,

K.S. SUBBIAH PILLAIversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

1999 INSC 9410 March 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), was assessed for several years on the ground that remuneration and commission received by its Karta, K.S. Subbiah Pillai, were income of the HUF. The Madras High Court held the amounts were assessable to the HUF, while the Andhra Pradesh High Court had decided otherwise. T

FAG PRECISION BEARINGSversusSALES TAX OFFICER (I) AND ANR.

1996 INSC 14459 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax stayed the appellant's assessments for the period 1 September 1976 to 31 August 1984, citing that the assessment was still in progress and would not be completed within the statutory time limit. The appellant challenged the stay, arguing that no show‑cause notice was served and that

N.C. DASversusM.A. MOHSIN AND ANR.

1997 INSC 6459 September 1997Dismissed

The petitioner filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court seeking to compel the Patna High Court to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents for alleged non‑compliance with a prior order. The High Court held that the order had been complied with, declined to entertain the contempt application

TEJKUMAR BALAKRISHNA RUIAversusA.K. MENON AND ANOTHER

1996 INSC 10109 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Tej Kumar Balakrishna Rui, was declared a notified person under Section 3(2) of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992. Section 3(3) of the Act provides that any property of a notified person stands attached from the date of notification. After being notifi

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusGARWARE NYLONS LTD. ETC.

1996 INSC 10119 September 1996Dismissed

Garware Nylon Ltd. manufactured nylon yarn and nylon twine. Until 1977 the twine was cleared under Item 18 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, which allowed a partial exemption for fishing‑net use. After the introduction of Item 68 in 1977, the revenue re‑classified the twine under Item 68 and demanded duty, whic

COMMISSIONER, SALES TAX, U.P., LUCKNOWversusM/S. GIRJA SHANKER AWANISH KUMAR

1996 INSC 10129 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Commissioner of Sales Tax appealed against a High Court order that had accepted the turnover disclosed in the assessee's account books despite the assessee's failure to maintain a stock register as required under Section 12(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948. The assessee, a manufacturer of silver ornament

K. RAMULLANversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN

2000 INSC 3849 August 2000Appeal(s) allowed

K. Ramullan, an Indian-origin Malaysian citizen, owned a Non‑Resident (External) Account in an Indian bank and stayed in India with his wife for medical treatment from June 1982 to April 1985. He claimed exemption from tax on the interest earned under Section 10(4A) of the Income Tax Act, arguing that he was a "person

BHARAT EARTH MOVERSversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KARNATAKA

2000 INSC 3859 August 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Bharat Earth Movers created a fund to meet its liability for encashment of earned and vacation leave of its employees and claimed a deduction of Rs 62,25,483 under Section 37(1) of the Income‑Tax Act for AY 1978‑79. The Karnataka High Court held the provision to be a contingent liability and disallowed the deduction, w

THE K.C.P. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

2000 INSC 3869 August 2000Dismissed

K.C.P. Ltd., a sugar manufacturer, challenged a government notification fixing the levy price of sugar and obtained an interim order allowing it to sell at the pre‑notification price. During the assessment year 1972‑73 it collected Rs 14,96,130 in excess of the levy price. The Income‑Tax Officer treated this amount as

20TH CENTURY FINANCE CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2000 INSC 3049 May 2000

The appellants, leasing companies, entered into master lease agreements for equipment and were taxed by several states on the transfer of the right to use the goods. The states relied on explanations in their sales tax statutes that deemed the taxable event to occur where the goods were used, irrespective of where the

STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.versusKAUSHIKBHAI K. PATEL AND ANR.

2000 INSC 3109 May 2000Dismissed

The respondent, owner of an omnibus, filed Form NT declaring non‑use of the vehicle from 1 July 1995 to 31 March 1996 and claimed a refund of motor‑vehicle tax. The refund was allowed for the first three months but denied for the remaining period because the State required proof that the non‑use beyond three months was

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUJARAT, AHMEDABADversusSMT. KAMALTNI KHATAU

1994 INSC 1989 May 1994

The Supreme Court examined whether the tax authorities could choose to assess tax on either the trustees or the beneficiaries of a discretionary trust when the trust's income was distributed and actually received by the beneficiaries during the accounting year. The respondent, a beneficiary of six discretionary trusts,

EASTERN CHEMICAL AND MINERALSversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

1999 INSC 909 March 1999Dismissed

Eastern Chemical and Minerals exported ferro‑silicon under a barter arrangement and, in return, received import licences for pesticides which it later assigned to users for consideration. The company claimed exemption from additional tax under Section 104(1) of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961, relying on Notification No. S.O.

DALMIA INDUSTRIES LTD. AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF UITAR PRADESH AND ANR.

1994 INSC 599 February 1994Dismissed

The Uttar Pradesh Government decided to privatise the loss‑making Uttar Pradesh State Cement Corporation Ltd. and entered into a memorandum with Dalmia Industries Ltd. for the latter to acquire 51% of the shares. While the transfer was pending, the High Court stayed the privatisation and issued several interim orders.

SEA PEARL INDUSTRIES AND ORS., ETCversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN

2001 INSC 109 January 2001Dismissed

Sea Pearl Industries, a processor of seafood, entered into an agreement with an eligible export house to export its processed products. The export house opened a Letter of Credit in its own name, which was later endorsed to Sea Pearl and the foreign exchange credited to its account. Sea Pearl claimed a deduction under

COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX AND ANR.versusM/S. P.T. ENTERPRISES AND ANR.

1999 INSC 5478 December 1999Appeal(s) allowed

A truck carrying 120 bags of supari owned by the respondent was stopped at a checkpost in Madhya Pradesh. The sales tax authorities found that the value declared in the accompanying documents was lower than the market value and issued a notice under Section 29-A(II) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, se

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusM/S. CHHABRA BRICKS AND TILES MFG. CO.

1999 INSC 5488 December 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh issued the U.P. Coal Control Order, 1977 under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, requiring licences for brick kilns using slack coal and imposing conditions on the sale, price, size and export of the bricks produced. Brick manufacturers challenged the order, and the Allahabad

T.D. VENKATA RAOversusUNION OF INDIA

1998 INSC 4668 December 1998Dismissed

The appellant, representing Income Tax Practitioners, challenged the constitutional validity of Section 44(AB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which mandates that the accounts of businesses with turnover exceeding Rs 40 lakh and professionals with receipts exceeding Rs 10 lakh be audited only by a Chartered Accountant. Th

M/S. KILPEST PVT. LTD.versusSHEKHAR MEHRA

1996 INSC 11598 October 1996Dismissed

Mehra and Dubey, the original promoters of Kilpest Pvt. Ltd., fell out and Mehra was removed as director and denied notice of meetings that led to share allotments favoring Dubey. Mehra filed a petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 alleging oppression and mismanagement, which the High Court tri

M/S. LIPTON INDIA LTD. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11658 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, Lipton India Ltd., challenged a Karnataka High Court judgment that was based on an affidavit filed by the State Government asserting that a sales‑tax Government Order had not been published in the Official Gazette nor laid before the Legislature. The affidavit, verified by Deputy Commissioner R. Krishna

INDIAN HOTELS CO. LTD. AND ORS.versusINCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI AND ORS.

2000 INSC 3798 August 2000Case Partly allowed

The petitioners – Indian Hotels Co. Ltd., Hotel & Allied Traders Pvt. Ltd. and Hotel Shashi Pvt. Ltd. – claimed that their hotel‑related activities, including a large‑scale flight kitchen, qualified as a "newly established industrial undertaking" and therefore entitled them to deductions under Section 80J and investmen

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusJAIN SHUDH VANASPATI LTD. AND ANR.

1996 INSC 8568 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents imported 13,500 metric tonnes of RBD palm oil in stainless‑steel containers, which are a prohibited item, but the containers were painted to appear as mild‑steel. Customs issued show‑cause notices under Section 28 (duty not levied or short‑levied) and Section 124 (confiscation) of the Customs Act. The D

M.A. JACKSONversusCOLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

1997 INSC 5318 July 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a returning resident from Dubai, imported a used Volvo car under the Transfer of Residence Rules and paid customs duty based on an assessable value of Rs 53,305.44. The customs authorities later issued a show‑cause notice under Section 20(1) alleging a short levy, re‑valuing the car at a much higher amou

INDIAN PETROCHEMICALS CORPN. LTD. AND ANR.versusSHRAMIK SENA AND ORS .

1999 INSC 1628 April 1999

In the civil appeals filed by India Petrochemicals Corp. Ltd. (employer) and the employees arising from a Bombay High Court judgment, the employees attempted to introduce an additional affidavit dated 19 February 1999 without any court order permitting its filing. The employer did not file a reply to the affidavit. The

INDIAN PETROCHEMICALS CORPN. LTD. AND ANR.versusSHRAMIK SENA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 1638 April 1999

In the civil appeals filed by India Petrochemicals Corp. Ltd. (employer) and the employees arising from a Bombay High Court judgment, the employees attempted to introduce an additional affidavit dated 19 February 1999 without any court order permitting its filing. The employer did not file a reply to the affidavit. The

SMT. KILASHO DEVI BURMAN AND OTHERSversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX WEST BENGAL, CALCUTTA

1996 INSC 2088 February 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, members of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), contended that no valid assessment order had been issued for the HUF for assessment year 1955-56 because the order was unsigned, and that they never received statutory notices. The Income Tax Officer proceeded under Section 147(a) and later under Sections 148 a

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUMversusM/S TRANVANCORE TITANIUM PRODUCTS LTD.

2000 INSC 5767 December 2000Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Tranvancore Titanium Products Ltd obtained a loan of Rs. 491 lakhs from the Kerala Government and created a "Loan Redemption Reserve" of Rs. 1 crore to meet the loan liability. The assessing authority treated the amount as a provision and excluded it from capital for the purpose of surtax under the Companies (Profi

HYDERABAD ASBESTOS CEMENT PRODUCTS AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 5447 December 1999Dismissed

Hyderabad Asbestos Cement Products and another manufactured asbestos cement items using cement and asbestos fibre, each excisable under different tariff items. The company sought credit for excise duty paid on the raw materials against duty on the finished products under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The

ABDUL KARIMversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 5057 November 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined applications filed by the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) under Section 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code to withdraw TADA charges against accused linked to the forest brigand Veerappan, whose kidnapping of actor Rajkumar prompted the Karnataka government to concede to his demands. The SPP’s

TMA PAI FOUNDATION AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 3207 October 1993Disposed off

The Supreme Court was asked to resolve the impasse over admission and fee structures in private professional colleges after the Government of India had permitted admission of foreign students up to 50% of seats. The Court held that, in view of the J.P. Unnikrishnan judgment, such permission could not be enforced for th

M/S. ADITYA MINERALS PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ANDHRA PRADESH

1999 INSC 3807 September 1999Dismissed

Aditya Minerals Pvt. Ltd. obtained a 15‑year mining lease with a monthly rent of Rs.35 per acre and was required to deposit an amount equal to the total rent for the lease term as a guarantee, which was adjustable against monthly rent and bore no interest. The assessee claimed this deposit as revenue expenditure for th

MANGAT MAL (DEAD) AND ANOTHERversusSMT. PUNNI DEVI (DEAD) AND OTHERS

1995 INSC 5427 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

In 1934 a widow, Sukh Devi, was awarded specific immovable property and a lump‑sum by arbitration as compensation for her pre‑existing right to maintenance from her father‑in‑law’s joint family. After the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into force, the widow sold the property in 1960, and the sale was challenged on the

M/S SIRDANWAL INDUSTRIESversusCOMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX

1996 INSC 8367 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Sirdanwal Industries appealed against the Commissioner of Sales Tax challenging the classification of its brass wire under the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948. The issue was whether the brass wire, an alloy of copper and zinc, fell within the entry "copper, tin, nickel, or zinc, or any other alloy containing any

SUBRATA ACHARJEE AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2002 INSC 687 February 2002Dismissed

The petition challenged the constitutional validity of the Constitution (Seventy‑second Amendment) Act, 1992 which inserted sub‑Article (3B) into Article 332, providing that seats for Scheduled Tribes in the Tripura Legislative Assembly would be reserved based on the existing number of ST members rather than on populat

K. ASHOK REDDY ETC.versusTHE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 507 February 1994Dismissed

K. Ashok Reddy filed a writ petition seeking a declaration that High Court judges could not be transferred under Article 222 of the Constitution, alleging that transfers were arbitrary, biased and eroded judicial independence, and that the Supreme Court's Judges' Case‑II had wrongly excluded judicial review, conflictin

STATE OF M.P.versusBHUPENDRA SINGH

2000 INSC 97 January 2000Dismissed

The respondent was arrested on 17 February 1977 with detonators in his possession and was charged under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. He challenged the prosecution on the ground that the consent required under Section 7 of the Act had not been properly obtained. The High Court of Madhya Prades

MAHMOOD HASAN AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1997 INSC 67 January 1997Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a massive promotion anomaly in the Uttar Pradesh Food and Civil Supplies Department where numerous junior clerks were promoted to Supply Inspector posts in violation of seniority rules, depriving senior employees of their rightful promotions. The petitioners argued that these promotions breac

RAMESH BHAI J. PATEL ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA

2000 INSC 5736 December 2000Dismissed

The appellants, assessors under the Income Tax Act, challenged the interpretation of Section 269UA(b) regarding the calculation of "apparent consideration" for immovable property transferred to the Central Government. They argued that the discount should be computed for the period between the Government's payment of th

STATE OF A.P. AND ORS.versusN. AUDIKESAVA REDDY AND ORS.

2001 INSC 5596 November 2001Case Partly allowed

The case concerned the interpretation of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulations) Act, 1976 with respect to whether a master plan existing at the time of the Act's commencement or a later master plan should be used to determine if land is vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit. The State of Andhra Pradesh sought to e

ION EXCHANGE (INDIA) LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 4126 November 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Ion Exchange (India) Ltd., a manufacturer of water purifiers, advertised that its products provided 100% safe drinking water instantly and remained bacteria‑free in storage. The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission, under the MRTP Act, instituted an inquiry and the company accepted a Cease and Desist O

RELIANCE SILICON (I) PVT. LTD.versusCOLLECTOR, CENTRAL EXCISE, THANE

1996 INSC 12946 November 1996

The Supreme Court examined three groups of appeals concerning the classification of silicone products for Central Excise and Customs duties. It held that silicone oil that has undergone condensation, polycondensation or polyaddition falls under Central Excise Tariff Item 15A(1) and the corresponding Customs heading 39.

M/S. PAPPU SWEETS AND BISCUITS ETC.versusCOMMISSIONER OF TRADE TAX U.P. LUCKNOW

1998 INSC 3836 October 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, industrial units manufacturing toffees in Uttar Pradesh, applied for eligibility certificates under a 1991 notification granting sales‑tax exemption to new and expanding units, but were denied on the ground that toffee was a "sweetmeat" listed in Annexure II of the notification. The High Court upheld th

HARSHAD S. MEHTA AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2001 INSC 4296 September 2001Dismissed

The appellants, Harshad S. Mehta and others, sought to revoke conditional pardons granted by the Special Court under the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, arguing that the Court lacked jurisdiction to grant pardon because the power under Sections 306 and 307 of the Crim

HIGH COURT OF M.PversusMARESH PRAKASH AND ORS.

1994 INSC 3596 September 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a Civil Judge Class‑II, sought confirmation and seniority dating from 5 February 1973, alleging that the High Court's Full Court was influenced by the Chief Justice's unsatisfactory remarks and that the Grievance Committee's comparative assessment was ignored. The High Court's Division Bench set aside t

THE BRITISH MACHINERY SUPPLIES CO.versusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 8266 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

British Machinery Supplies Co., a manufacturer of sewing machines, imported rotating hooks with bobbin cases intended for industrial sewing machines. The Assistant Collector of Customs levied a higher duty under heading 84.2 (domestic sewing machines) instead of the 40% duty under item 84.41(1) (not elsewhere specified

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusDELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL MILLS CO. LTD.

1997 INSC 4826 May 1997Dismissed

The Union of India sought excise duty on calcium carbide produced by Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. (DCM) for use as an intermediate in its acetylene gas plant. DCM argued that the carbide was not marketable—lacking purity and proper packaging—and therefore not an excisable commodity. The Appellate Collector and

NATIONAL ORGANIC CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY

1997 INSC 16 January 1997Appeal(s) allowed

National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd., a recognised refinery, manufactured ethylene, butylene and propylene and claimed that these products fell under Item 11‑AA(2) of the Central Excise Tariff, thereby qualifying for an exemption notification of 21‑December‑1967. The Revenue, relying on a 24‑Nov‑1984 Trade Notice,

M/S. INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALversusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY - I

1996 INSC 14385 December 1996Dismissed

The case concerned the interpretation of Item 14‑D of the Central Excise Tariff, which reads ‘Synthetic organic dyestuffs (including pigment dyestuffs) and synthetic organic derivatives used in any dyeing process.’ The appellant argued that the phrase ‘used in any dyeing process’ applied to both dyestuffs and derivativ

TIN PLATE CO. OF INDIA LTD.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1998 INSC 4115 November 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Tin Plate Co. of India Ltd., a manufacturer registered under the Bihar Sales Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act, filed its return for assessment year 1985‑86. The Commercial Tax Officer disallowed its claim of stock transfer as inter‑state sales and levied 10% tax, issuing a demand notice. The company cha

UNION OF LNDIA AND ORS.versusSUSHIL KUMAR MODI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 12805 November 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard appeals against a Patna High Court order that, in an application for extension of time, directed all CBI investigation reports in the Bihar "Fodder Scam" to be submitted directly to the High Court and barred the Director of the CBI from intervening in the investigation. The Court held that the D

M/S. ASPINWALL AND CO. LTD.versusTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ERNAKULAM.

2001 INSC 4265 September 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M/s Aspinwall and Co. Ltd., claimed investment allowance under Section 32A of the Income Tax Act for machinery used in coffee curing plants for the assessment years 1980-81 and 1983-84. The Income Tax Officer rejected the claim, but the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed it, a decision upheld b

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusRAJESH KUMAR CHIMANLAL BAROT AND ANR.

1996 INSC 8205 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Gujarat appealed against an order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which had upheld a Gram Panchayat's claim to a subsidised electricity rate. The appellant argued that the question of pricing did not fall within the jurisdiction of the consumer redressal forums. The Supreme Court hel

MIS. BALAJI ENTERPRISES, MADRASversusTHE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS

1997 INSC 4725 May 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Balaji Enterprises, a manufacturer of aluminium containers, purchased aluminium ingots and processed them into circles and containers. During this process, aluminium scrap was generated. The Central Excise Authority demanded duty on the scrap under Central Excise Tariff Item 27(a)(i) (aluminium in any crude form) at a

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, CALCUTTAversusSANJAY CHANDIRAM

1995 INSC 3395 May 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Collector of Customs appealed against the CEGAT order that had accepted the importer’s declared price for zip rolls as the transaction value despite the importer’s forged certificate of North Korean origin. The Supreme Court held that Rules 3 and 4 of the Customs Valuation Rules presume a genuine transaction value

R. DALMIAversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

1999 INSC 475 February 1999Dismissed

The appellants, R. Dalmia and others, challenged assessments and reassessments made by the Revenue under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, arguing that Section 144‑B, which provides a procedural safeguard and an extended 180‑day limitation period under Explanation 1(iv) to Section 153, does not apply to such assessmen

PRADIP CHANDRA PARIJA AND ORS.versusPRAMOD CHANDRA PATANAIK AND ORS.

2001 INSC 5904 December 2001Directions issued

The case arose when a two‑judge bench of the Supreme Court, disagreeing with a prior three‑judge decision in Nityananda Kar v. State of Orissa, ordered that the matter be placed before a five‑judge bench. The petitioners challenged whether such a referral was permissible under the Constitution and Supreme Court Rules.

M/S HINDUSTAN FERODO LTD.versusTHE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY

1996 INSC 14344 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Hindustan Ferodo Ltd. appealed against the finding of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal that its asbestos rings and fabrics fell under Item 22‑F of the Central Excise Tariff. The appellant submitted affidavits from a senior manager and an experienced asbestos dealer stating that the rings we

STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusSRI SRINIVASA SALES CIRCULATION

1996 INSC 11434 October 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a coupon scheme operated by Sri Srinivasa Sales Circulation where a customer paid Rs.5 for a coupon, received three coupons for Rs.16 each, sold them to three persons for Rs.5 each, and ultimately obtained an article of his choice after the downstream purchasers cleared their payments. The As

THE FEDERATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2000 INSC 3744 August 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Federation of Andhra Pradesh Chambers of Commerce and Industry and several industrialists appealed against a decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court that interpreted the word "used" in Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Non‑Agricultural Lands Assessment Act, 1963 to include land merely intended or set apart for indu

INDIAN PETROCHEMICALS CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.versusSHRAMIK SENA AND ORS.

1999 INSC 3024 August 1999Dismissed

The workmen employed in the statutory canteen of Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. filed a writ petition seeking declaration that they were regular employees of the corporation and were entitled to regularisation, pay scales and arrears. The Bombay High Court held that, relying on Parimal Chandra Raha v. LIC, the

BHADRACHALAM PAPERBOARDS LTD. AND ANR.versusTHE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

1998 INSC 2834 August 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Bhadracalam Paperboards Ltd. and another entered into an agreement with the Government of Andhra Pradesh for the supply of bamboo and hardwood from state forests. Under the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Act, the Forest Department, as a dealer, was liable to pay sales tax on the value of the extracted timber, but the appella

TATA DAVY LTD. ETC.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 5914 August 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Tata Davy Ltd was declared a sick industrial company under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 and a reconstruction scheme was sanctioned by the Board. The company had arrears of sales tax under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, and the State sought attachment of its property under section 13‑A o

UPPER GANGES SUGAR MILLS LTD. ETC.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CALCUTTA

1997 INSC 5924 August 1997Dismissed

Upper Ganges Sugar Mills Ltd donated Rs 25,000 to the Vishwa Mangal Trust and claimed a deduction under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Income‑Tax Officer initially allowed the deduction, but the assessment was later reopened under Section 147(b) and the claim was disallowed. The assessee’s appeal was dism

MR. JUSTICE DEOKI NANDAN AGARWALAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1999 INSC 2164 May 1999Dismissed

A High Court judge filed an income‑tax return asserting that his constitutional salary was not taxable under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The tax authorities rejected his claim and the matter reached the Supreme Court on a special leave petition. The Court considered whether the salaries payable under Articles 125 and 221

CHANDRA PRAKASH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

2002 INSC 1814 April 2002

The case concerned a dispute over inter‑se seniority between temporary doctors appointed on an ad‑hoc basis in the Uttar Pradesh Provincial Medical Services and doctors selected through the Public Service Commission. A three‑Judge Bench had earlier held that temporary doctors could count seniority from their initial ap

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAIversusM/S. VIRGO STEELS, BOMBAY AND ANR.

2002 INSC 1824 April 2002Dismissed

The Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai initiated recovery proceedings against Mis. Virgo Steels and Associated Cement Company Ltd for duty‑free steel imported after the cement project was abandoned, in violation of the Deemed Export Scheme. Virgo Steels admitted the illegality in a letter, expressly waived its right to a

M/S GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY

2002 INSC 1834 April 2002Dismissed

Grasim Industries imported 14,700 Karbate Tubes, artificial graphite components of heat exchangers, and sought classification under Chapter 84 (sub‑heading 8419.50) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Revenue argued that Note I(a) of Chapter 84 expressly excludes such items as "other articles of Chapter 68" and theref

M/S. POULOSE AND MATHENversusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND ANR.

1997 INSC 1004 February 1997Appeal(s) allowed

Poulose & Mathen, manufacturers of liquid carbon‑dioxide, received impure CO2 waste from a fertilizer plant under licence L‑6 and claimed exemption under Notification No. 7/65, which exempts carbon‑dioxide used for any industrial purpose. A show‑cause notice dated 20‑Nov‑1978 demanded excise duty for the period March 1

PALGHAT JILA THANDAN SAMUDAYA SAMRAKSHA SAMITHI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

1993 INSC 3823 December 1993

The petitioners, members of the Thandan community in the erstwhile Malabar (Palghat) district of Kerala, challenged the State Government's 1987 order that sought to exclude them from Scheduled Caste (SC) status despite their inclusion in the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order. The State argued that Thandans in the M

ASHIRWAD ISPAT UDYOG AND ORS.versusSTATE LEVEL COMMITTEE AND ORS.

1998 INSC 4103 November 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants purchased iron and steel scrap and cut it into smaller pieces for use by rolling mills and other manufacturers. They obtained a tax‑exemption eligibility certificate under a notification issued under Section 12 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, which was later cancelled on the ground that the

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JABALPURversusMIS. DURGA ENGINEERING AND FOUNDRY WORKS

2000 INSC 3733 August 2000Appeal(s) allowed

For the assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89 the Assessing Officer added income to Mis. Durga Engineering and Foundry Works under Section 68, treating certain cash credits as unexplained. The Commissioner upheld the additions, but the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal set aside the assessments and directed a fresh order. T

S.K. MUKHERJEEversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

1994 INSC 2963 August 1994Dismissed

The petitioner, appointed as a temporary Staff Officer‑cum‑Instructor in the West Bengal Directorate of Civil Defence in 1965, claimed to be a member of the Civil Defence Corps and sought uniform service conditions under the Central Civil Defence Act, 1968. He argued that the Central Government, which can frame regulat

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, MADRASversusINDIA ORGANIC CHEMICALS LTD.

2000 INSC 2803 May 2000Appeal(s) allowed

India Organic Chemicals Ltd. imported a diesel engine set for Rs 8,50,740 and was assessed additional duty at 8 % ad valorem under Customs Tariff Item 68. The company claimed a refund, arguing that the set comprised a diesel engine and an alternator and that each component should be assessed separately for additional d

STATE OF U.P.versusAMEER ALI

1996 INSC 4783 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased wife was attacked by her husband, who beat her, poured kerosine on her and set her on fire. She gave two dying declarations, one to an Executive Magistrate on the day of the incident and another to a Sub‑Inspector the following day, both describing the accused's actions. At trial, the Sessions Court convic

M/S. STP LIMITEDversusCONTROLLER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PATNA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 7802 December 1997Appeal(s) allowed

MIS. STP Ltd., a manufacturer of coal‑tar products, claimed exemption from excise duty under Notification 121/62‑CE which exempts ‘tar’ falling under Tariff Item 11(5). The Central Excise authority argued that the various pitches produced by the company were not ‘tar’ within that clause and therefore not exempt. The Tr

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXversusRAM KUMAR AGGARWAL AND BROS.

1993 INSC 3542 November 1993

The assessee, a partnership firm dealing in shares, bought all equity shares of a company in 1945 and treated those shares as stock-in-trade for tax purposes. When the company was liquidated, the liquidator distributed a surplus to the shareholders, and the assessee received Rs. 32,25,550. The Income Tax Officer includ

H.H. SIR RAMA VARMA (DEAD) BY L.RS.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KERALA

1993 INSC 3552 November 1993Dismissed

The assessee earned long‑term capital gains in the accounting year relevant to AY 1970‑71 and had a carried‑forward long‑term capital loss from earlier years. He claimed a deduction under Section 80T of the Income‑Tax Act on the basis that the deduction should be computed on the gross capital gains before the loss was

SHRI GOVIND PRASADversusSH. R.G. PRASAD AND ORS.

1993 INSC 3582 November 1993Disposed off

The case concerned promotion of Junior Engineers in the Electrical and Mechanical wings of the Uttar Pradesh Public Works Department to the post of Assistant Engineer. The State Government had issued an office memorandum on 7 January 1980 reducing the service‑experience requirement from ten to seven years, and the High

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) MUMBAIversusM/S. JAGDISH CANCER AND RESEARCH CENTRE

2001 INSC 3332 August 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The Jagdish Cancer and Research Centre imported a teletherapy unit under a duty‑free exemption granted by Notification No. 64/88, which required the hospital to provide free treatment to at least 40 % of outdoor patients, free treatment to all indoor patients whose family income was below Rs 500 and to reserve 10 % of

REVA INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX, GUJARAT II

2001 INSC 2442 May 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Reva Investment Pvt Ltd transferred jewellery, valued at Rs 13,91,350, to its twelve wholly‑owned subsidiary companies in exchange for fully paid equity shares having a face value of Rs 5,69,400. The subsidiaries held no assets other than the jewellery, while the shares received represented the entire shareholding of t

THE COMMISSIONERversusGRIHA YAJAMANULA SAMKHYA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 2432 May 2001Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined several writ petitions challenging the assessment of property tax in Hyderabad and other municipal corporations. The core dispute was whether the Municipal Commissioner’s power to determine the rateable value and annual rental value of properties was limited by the recommendations of a Distri

THESTOCKEXCHANGE,AHMEDABADversusASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD

2001 INSC 1302 March 2001

The Ahmedabad Stock Exchange sought to dispose of the membership of its deceased member, Rajesh Shah, after his heirs declared they could not meet his liabilities. The Exchange declared him a deemed defaulter and exercised its right under the Exchange Rules to vest the membership in the Exchange and sell it. The Assist

TIRUMALA TRIUPATI DEVASTHANAMSversusK.M. KRISHNALAH

1998 INSC 1212 March 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The plaintiff, K.M. Krishnah, sued Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) for a permanent injunction over 2.29 acres of land. The trial court dismissed the suit for lack of title and possession; the plaintiff later amended the suit to seek possession after being dispossessed on 30 August 1969, filing the amendment on 25

M/S. RAINBOW COLOUR LAB AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2000 INSC 472 February 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Rainbow Colour Lab and other photographers challenged demand notices issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh on the ground that their turnover from taking photographs, developing negatives and printing prints was subject to sales tax. The State, relying on a circular issued after the 46th Constitutional Amendment, treate

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.versusKUMARI TANUJA

1999 INSC 302 February 1999Dismissed

The petitioners, members of the Hindu Bawa community who migrated from Sindh, claimed that they were entitled to reservation benefits for Nomadic tribes under the Maharashtra Government Resolution of 21 November 1961, which listed "Gosavi" and its synonyms, including Bawa. The State of Maharashtra issued a later resolu

M/S. K. GOVINDAN AND SONSversusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COCHIN

2000 INSC 5611 December 2000Dismissed

The assessee, K. Govindan & Sons, filed a return for AY 1984‑85 in response to a notice under Section 148. The assessing officer levied interest under Section 139(8) and Section 217, which the assessee contested on the ground that the assessment was not a "regular assessment" within the meaning of Section 2(40) and the

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMSversusM/S. MODI RUBBER LTD.

1999 INSC 5361 December 1999Dismissed

Mis. Modi Rubber Ltd. imported styrene‑butadiene latex and claimed exemption from customs duty under Notification No. 82/86 (as amended) which exempts raw rubber and latex. Clause IA of the notification excludes "styrene butadiene rubber and oil‑extended styrene butadiene rubber". The Customs authority denied the exemp

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusDR. MANMOHAN SINGH AND ORS.

1999 INSC 5371 December 1999Dismissed

Dr. Manmohan Singh, then a Union Cabinet Minister, filed Form No.1 under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 stating that but for his office he would be ordinarily resident in the Dispur Assembly constituency of Assam. The Election Commission questioned this declaration, initiated an enquiry and the Chief Election

PUREWAL ASSOCIATES LTD. ETC.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

1996 INSC 11301 October 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered two separate appeals concerning the classification of manufactured articles under the Central Excise Tariff. In the first appeal (Civil Appeal No. 2800/84), Purewal Associates Ltd., a watch manufacturer, argued that four watch components (lid screw, barrel axle screw, bridge screw and dial‑

KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN.versusSMT. LAKSHMIDEVAMMA AND ANR.

2001 INSC 2341 May 2001Dismissed

The employee was dismissed after a domestic enquiry which the Labour Court held to be invalid. The employer then sought permission to adduce fresh evidence to justify the dismissal, but did so only after the preliminary issue on the enquiry's validity had been decided. The High Court dismissed the employer's writ petit

MAFATLAL INDUSTRIES LTD.versusNADIAD NAGAR PALIKA AND ANR.

2000 INSC 1141 March 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Mafatlal Industries Ltd, a textile manufacturer, brought cloth rolls of 100 metres into the municipal limits of Nadiad and cut them into smaller pieces before sending them out of the town. The issue was whether octroi duty under Section 99 of the Gujarat Municipal Act, 1963 was payable on those cloth pieces. The Gujara

KOLUTHARA EXPORTS LTD.versusST ATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 591 February 2002Appeal(s) allowed

Koluthara Exports Ltd., a dealer engaged in buying and exporting fish, was served with a notice under Section 4(2) of the Kerala Fishermen's Welfare Fund Act, 1985 requiring it to contribute one per cent of its sales proceeds to a welfare fund for fishermen. The company challenged the constitutional validity of this co

KOLHAPUR CANESUGAR WORKS LTD. ETC ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA

2000 INSC 401 February 2000Disposed off

Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd., a subsidiary of Kolhapur Sugar Mills Ltd., was granted a sugar incentive rebate for the 1973‑74 season. The Excise authorities later issued a show‑cause notice under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, demanding recovery of the rebate, alleging it was erroneously allowed. While the

OBERAI FORWARDING AGENCYversusNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANR.

2000 INSC 421 February 2000

The appellant, Oberai Forwarding Agency, was hired to transport a consignment of broken rice, which was lost in transit. The consignee (second respondent) claimed the loss from New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (first respondent), which paid compensation and obtained a "Letter of Subrogation" and a Special Power of Attorney

RAM AWADH (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusACHHAIBAR DUBEY AND ANR.

2000 INSC 431 February 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Bachna filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell a property but did not initially plead that she was ready and willing to perform her part of the contract; this plea was later added by amendment. The defendants were the legal representatives of a subsequent purchaser of the property, who sought to r

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search