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

        Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Decision on Finality of Tribunal's Ruling

        COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX Versus SUPER COTTON BOWL REFILLING WORKS

        COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX Versus SUPER COTTON BOWL REFILLING WORKS - 1989 (40) E.L.T. 247 (SC), [1989] 73 STC 61 (SC), Issues Involved:
        1. Interpretation of sub-section (5) of Section 35 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.
        2. Nature of the Commissioner's decision under Section 35.
        3. Whether a revision lies to the High Court from the Tribunal's decision.

        Detailed Analysis:

        1. Interpretation of sub-section (5) of Section 35 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948:

        The primary issue in these appeals is the interpretation of sub-section (5) of Section 35 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. The question is whether a revision lies to the High Court from the decision of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, which has been the subject of an appeal before the Tribunal. The High Court examined the scheme of the Act and the amendments introduced by U.P. Act 12 of 1979. The High Court concluded that no further revision lies to the High Court from the Tribunal's decision, as sub-section (5) of Section 35 states that the decision of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, subject to an appeal to the Tribunal, shall be final. The High Court referred to the decision in Indo Lube Refiners v. Sales Tax Officer, Sector-1, Gorakhpur [(1987) 66 STC 145], which supported this view.

        2. Nature of the Commissioner's decision under Section 35:

        The High Court and the Supreme Court both addressed the nature of the Commissioner's decision under Section 35. The High Court observed that the Commissioner did not act as a tribunal while dealing with an application under Section 35, and the nature of his jurisdiction is administrative. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with this view, stating that the language of Section 35 enjoins a decision by the Commissioner, which envisages that the decision is quasi-judicial or judicial and cannot be characterized as administrative. The Supreme Court emphasized that the decision of the Commissioner under Section 35 is binding and final, subject to an appeal to the Tribunal.

        3. Whether a revision lies to the High Court from the Tribunal's decision:

        The Supreme Court examined whether a further revision lies to the High Court from the Tribunal's decision. The Court noted that Section 11 of the Act, as amended, provides for revision by the High Court in special cases. However, the Court emphasized that sub-section (5) of Section 35, after the amendment, states that the decision of the Commissioner of Sales Tax shall be final, subject to an appeal to the Tribunal. The Court concluded that the scheme of the Act does not contemplate a further revision to the High Court against a decision of the Tribunal. The Supreme Court referred to the legislative intent and the natural meaning of the words used in the Act. The Court held that the High Court was correct in concluding that no further revision lies to the High Court in such a situation. However, the Court noted that the High Court could exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution in appropriate cases.

        Conclusion:

        The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision that no further revision lies to the High Court from the Tribunal's decision under Section 35 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. The appeals were dismissed, and the parties were directed to bear their own costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found