Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal Criticizes Official for Violations in Pricing Comparison & Evidence Examination</h1> <h3>NIZAM SUGARS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VISAKHAPATNAM</h3> NIZAM SUGARS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VISAKHAPATNAM - 2006 (202) E.L.T. 326 (Tri. - Bang.) Issues involved:1. Violation of Tribunal's remand directions and judicial indiscipline by Asst. Commissioner.2. Comparison of prices with unequal class of buyers by Commissioner.3. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice.4. Assessment finalization and reopening of the matter by Asst. Commissioner without challenge by Revenue.5. Examination of extraneous evidence not part of show cause notice.Analysis:1. Violation of Tribunal's remand directions and judicial indiscipline by Asst. Commissioner:The appeals in question raised a common issue regarding the enhancement of assessable value by the Revenue for clearances made by the assessee to a public sector undertaking. The Tribunal had previously remanded the matter with clear directions, emphasizing the need to draw comparisons between sales made to similar classes of buyers. However, the Asst. Commissioner failed to follow the Tribunal's directions, displaying clear judicial indiscipline. This non-compliance was deemed unacceptable, leading to a disapproval of the Asst. Commissioner's actions.2. Comparison of prices with unequal class of buyers by Commissioner:The Commissioner, while disagreeing with the Asst. Commissioner's comparison of prices with unequal classes of buyers, still proceeded to confirm the demands based on certain sale particulars not disclosed to the appellants. This action was seen as a violation of the Tribunal's final order and the Principles of Natural Justice. The Commissioner's decision to examine extraneous evidence not part of the show cause notice was considered a mistake, rendering the impugned order unsustainable in law.3. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:The violation of the Principles of Natural Justice was highlighted concerning the failure to disclose certain sale particulars to the appellants and the examination of evidence not part of the show cause notice. This lack of transparency and procedural fairness raised significant concerns regarding the validity of the Commissioner's actions.4. Assessment finalization and reopening of the matter by Asst. Commissioner without challenge by Revenue:The Asst. Commissioner's decision to reopen the assessment without the Revenue challenging the finalization of the assessment was deemed legally unsustainable. The Asst. Commissioner's actions were criticized for not adhering to the established legal procedures and for reopening the matter without proper justification or challenge.5. Examination of extraneous evidence not part of show cause notice:The Commissioner's reliance on extraneous evidence not included in the show cause notice was considered a procedural error. This deviation from standard legal practices undermined the fairness and integrity of the decision-making process, leading to the order being deemed unsustainable in law.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside both the orders and remanded the matter to the original authority with strict directions to adhere to the Tribunal's remand directions. The appellants were granted the opportunity to raise all relevant points, including issues related to the finalization of assessment and time-barred demands. The Original Authority was instructed to complete the proceedings within a specified timeframe while ensuring compliance with the Principles of Natural Justice and the directions provided in the remand order. The appeals were allowed by remand to the Original Authority for further proceedings.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found