Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        -

        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>Court remands case for fresh adjudication due to natural justice violation, no punitive action despite contemptuous conduct.</h1> <h3>M/s Gupta G And Company Versus Union of India and others</h3> The Court remanded the case back to the Settlement Commission for fresh adjudication due to the violation of natural justice principles resulting from the ... Principles of natural justice - non-furnishing of the communication dated 25.5.2017 - HELD THAT:- The material which was not furnished to the petitioner has been taken into account while passing final impugned order, thereby, violating the fundamental principles of natural justice, counsel for the parties have agreed for remanding the matter back to the Settlement Commission for a fresh adjudication in accordance with law. On the alternative prayer of the counsel for petitioner for referring the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority, it is also agreed that in case of non-consensus of claim/counter claim i.e. duty declared by petitioner vis-a-vis duty proposed by DRI, the Settlement Commission shall also consider the aspect of referring back the matter to the adjudicating authority in view of the provisions of Section 127-I of the Customs Act, 1962 and case law on the issue. The impugned order dated 31.7.2017, (Annexure P13), passed by the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Settlement Commission, is set aside with a direction to the Settlement Commission to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. Issues:1. Challenge to order confirming custom duty demand by Settlement Commission.2. Allegation of non-furnishing of crucial communication leading to violation of natural justice.3. Petitioner's plea supported by evidence of undelivered communication.4. Contemptuous conduct by respondents acknowledged but not penalized.5. Agreement for remanding the matter back to Settlement Commission for fresh adjudication.6. Consideration of referring the matter back to Adjudicating Authority in case of non-consensus on duty.Analysis:1. The petitioner, an importer, challenged the order confirming a custom duty demand by the Settlement Commission, alleging mis-declaration of goods and their value. The Court noted the petitioner's contention that reliance on a communication not provided to them violated natural justice. The matter was remanded back to the Settlement Commission for fresh adjudication, with parties directed to appear before the Commission on a specified date.2. The petitioner raised concerns about non-furnishing of a crucial communication dated 25.5.2017, which was relied upon in the final order. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) claimed to have sent the communication via Speed Post, but the petitioner presented evidence that it was received back undelivered. The Court acknowledged the violation of natural justice principles and agreed to set aside the impugned order for fresh adjudication.3. The Court noted that the DRI's assertion of communicating the crucial letter to the petitioner was contradicted by evidence of it being undelivered. The petitioner's misc. application included a letter establishing the non-delivery, highlighting the incorrect statement made by the respondents. The Court refrained from penalizing the respondents for contemptuous conduct but emphasized the importance of accurate submissions before the Court.4. Despite acknowledging the contemptuous conduct and incorrect statements made by the respondents, the Court opted not to initiate punitive action due to the assurance of caution given by the officer present in Court. The decision to remand the matter back to the Settlement Commission for fresh adjudication was made in light of the violation of natural justice principles.5. Both parties agreed to remand the matter back to the Settlement Commission for a fresh adjudication in accordance with the law. Additionally, in case of a lack of consensus on duty amounts between the petitioner and the DRI, the Settlement Commission was directed to consider referring the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority, as per the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and relevant case law.6. The Court's decision to set aside the impugned order and direct the matter for fresh adjudication underscored the significance of upholding natural justice principles in legal proceedings. The agreement between the parties to remand the matter back to the Settlement Commission demonstrated a collaborative effort to ensure a fair and lawful resolution to the dispute over custom duty demands.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found