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
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2022 (2) TMI 3

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed by him. While dismissing the same, learned Single Judge had made certain observations / remarks, which according to the appellant, are disparaging and undeserving. Feeling aggrieved against the adverse remarks made by the Writ Court and for the expunction of the same, the above appeal is filed. 4. Mr.Vijay Narayan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, would submit that : (a) the adverse remarks are not at all necessary for just and proper disposal of the writ petition and such undeserving remarks were made in breach of principles of natural justice. The comments made by the learned Single Judge are sought to be expunged, in particular those made in paragraphs 3, 4, 7, 8, 11 and 12 of the impugned order. (b) the castigating remarks against the appellant, without affording an opportunity of hearing affecting his reputation, integrity and conduct, are wholly unsustainable and bad in law. (c) such adverse remarks are absolutely unnecessary for proper adjudication of the writ petition and it would affect the appellants future career. (d) the unwarranted and uncharitable remarks imputing motives to the appellant as litigant really ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tively was incompatible with the test of some connection enunciated by a Bench of 3 Judges in Bhagatram Rajeevkumar and Bihar Chamber of Commerce. 7.4. The matters were thereafter listed before Two Judge Bench for hearing the appeals, in the light of the above Bench Judgment pronounced by the Constitutional Bench. The Two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court after finding that in the absence of the relevant data before the High Court, the issue whether the levy were compensatory or otherwise could not have been considered and referred the matter back to the High Court to decide the said aspect. 7.5. The matters were taken by the High Court after remitted by the Supreme Court and a number of High Courts, including the Madras High Court, have struck down the levy imposed by the respective States on the ground that they were discriminatory in nature and thus violative of Article 304(a) of the Constitution. 7.6. The Judgments and orders of various high Courts passed pursuant to the remand made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court were came to be challenged by the States concerned before the Supreme Court. Those appeals initially came up before a Two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court, w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....though similar goods are not produced within the taxing state. 1159.8 Article 304(a) frown upon discrimination (of a hostile nature in the protectionist sence) and not on mere differention. Therefore, incentives, set-offs, etc granted to a specified class of dealers for a limited period of time in a non-hostile fashion with a view to developing economically backward ares would not violate Article 304(a). The question whether the levies in the present case indeed satisfy this test is left to be determined by the regular Benches hearing the matters. 1160. States are well within their right to design their fiscal legislations to ensure that the tax burder on goods imported from states and goods produced within the state fall equally. Such measures if taken would not contravene Article 304(a) of the Constitution. The question whether the levies in the present case indeed satisfy this test is left to be determined by the regular Benches hearing the matters." 7.9. Importantly the question as to whether the Entire State can be notified as a local area and whether entry tax can be levied on the goods entering into the land mass of India from another country was left op....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l restraint is a virtue. A virtue which shall be concomitant of every judicial disposition. It is an attribute of a judge which he is obliged to keep refurbished from time to time, particularly while dealing with matters before him whether in exercise of appellate or revisional or other supervisory jurisdiction. Higher Courts must remind themselves constantly that higher tiers are provided in the judicial hierarchy to set right errors which could possibly have crept in the findings or orders of Courts at the lower tiers. Such powers are certainly not for belching diatribe at judicial personages in lower cadre. It is well to remember the words of a jurist that "a judge who has not committed any error is yet to be born". ...... 11. No greater damage can be caused to the administration of justice and to the confidence of people in judicial institutions when judges of higher courts publicly express lack of faith in the subordinate judges. It has been said, time and again, that respect for judiciary is not in hands by using intemperate language and by casting aspersions against lower judiciary. It is well to remember that a judicial officer against whom aspersions are made in t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ile laying down the three tests (quoted earlier) further observed : "It has also been recognised that judicial pronouncement must be judicial in nature and should not normally depart from sobriety, moderation and reserve." While quoting with approval the above above observations in Niranjan case this Court further observed : "We need only remind that the higher the forum and the greater the powers, the greater the need for restraint and the more mellowed the reproach should be." 12. Recently, in Abani Kanti Ray Vs. State of Orissa, 1995 Supp. (4) SCC 169, this Court had made the following observations after referring to the earlier cases of this Court including R.K. Lakshmanan and Niranjan: "What we have said above is nothing new and is only a reiteration of the established norms of judicial propriety and restraint expected from everyone discharging judicial functions. Use of intemperate language or making disparaging remarks against anyone unless that be the required for deciding the case, is inconsistent with judicial behaviour. Written Words in judicial orders form permanent record which make it even more necessary to practise self-re....