1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Supreme Court remits case for fresh consideration, emphasizes timely resolution of legal matters</h1> The Supreme Court accepted the State's reasons for the delay in filing writ appeals, remitted the case back to the High Court for fresh consideration, and ... - Issues involved:The issues involved in this case are the delay in filing writ appeals, the justification of the Division Bench's decision regarding stamp duty repayment, and the compliance with the provisions of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957.Delay in filing writ appeals:The State sought condonation of a 449-day delay in filing writ appeals against the order of the learned single Judge. The reasons for the delay were supported by an affidavit, which was considered acceptable by the Supreme Court due to the financial implications and the issues to be considered by the Division Bench.Justification of Division Bench's decision on stamp duty repayment:The Division Bench affirmed the single Judge's order directing the State to repay the stamp duty collected. The Supreme Court found that the Division Bench did not adequately consider the substantial grounds raised by the State, particularly in relation to the provisions of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. The Court set aside the Division Bench's order and remitted the case back to the High Court for fresh consideration.Compliance with Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957:The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court should consider the claims of all parties, including newly impleaded respondents, in accordance with the law. The Court did not express any views on the claims made by either party but directed the High Court to dispose of the case within six months from the date of the judgment.This judgment by the Supreme Court addressed the issues of delay in filing writ appeals, the justification of the Division Bench's decision on stamp duty repayment, and the compliance with the provisions of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. The Court accepted the reasons for the delay in filing appeals, set aside the Division Bench's order, and remitted the case back to the High Court for fresh consideration, emphasizing the need for a timely resolution in accordance with the law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
