Jage Ram and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

1 SCC 671Reported decision1971#1751 most cited

What is Jage Ram and Others v. State of Haryana and Others authority for?

A tax collected by the state government and spent away cannot be refunded even if the tax is later found to be ultra vires.

64

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2021.

Also referred to as

Jage Ram and Others v. State of Haryana · tax refund · spent away · afforestation · forest plantation · ultra vires · Section 98-A · utilization of collected tax

Judgments citing Jage Ram and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

M/S Garudadhri Impex Pvt. Ltd vs. State of Karnataka

WP/39190/2010HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…repel the contention of the petitioners that it is ultra vires Section 98-A of the Act. (u) In this regard, reliance was placed on Jage Ram and Others vs. State of Haryana and Others [(1971) 1 SCC 671], Rohit Pulp and Paper Mills Ltd., vs. Collector of Central Excise Baroda [(1990) 3 SCC 447], and Grasim Industries Ltd., vs. Collector of Customs, Bombay [(2002) 4 SCC 297]. (v) With regard to the demand for refund of tax paid by the petitioners, learned Additional Advocate General, submitted, that in the event petitioners succeed, there…

M/S Canara Minerals Private Limited vs. State of Karnataka

WP/13803/2008HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…repel the contention of the petitioners that it is ultra vires Section 98-A of the Act. (u) In this regard, reliance was placed on Jage Ram and Others vs. State of Haryana and Others [(1971) 1 SCC 671], Rohit Pulp and Paper Mills Ltd., vs. Collector of Central Excise Baroda [(1990) 3 SCC 447], and Grasim Industries Ltd., vs. Collector of Customs, Bombay [(2002) 4 SCC 297]. (v) With regard to the demand for refund of tax paid by the petitioners, learned Additional Advocate General, submitted, that in the event petitioners succeed, there…

Bellary Mining Corporation Ltd vs. State of Karnataka

WP/60230/2009HC Karnataka03 Dec 2015

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

…repel the contention of the petitioners that it is ultra vires Section 98-A of the Act. (u) In this regard, reliance was placed on Jage Ram and Others vs. State of Haryana and Others [(1971) 1 SCC 671], Rohit Pulp and Paper Mills Ltd., vs. Collector of Central Excise Baroda [(1990) 3 SCC 447], and Grasim Industries Ltd., vs. Collector of Customs, Bombay [(2002) 4 SCC 297]. (v) With regard to the demand for refund of tax paid by the petitioners, learned Additional Advocate General, submitted, that in the event petitioners succeed, there…

S Surendra Babu vs. State of Karnataka

WP/33134/2011HC Karnataka23 May 2012

Bench: The Honi3Le Mr Justi( E Asiiok B. Hinchigeri Writ Petition Nos.331 J352011(Jajj Wp Nos33134-33135 Of 2011 Between: 1. Ssureridra Bahu S/O Late Shankaraiah Hindu, Aged About 53 Years 2 Dmanjunath. S/O D Laxrnana, Hindu. Aged Ihout 50 Ears Both Are Al C/O 1 75 I Floor 2 Lh Cross C’ 1 310K J Ivanagal F3Angalore S2 Fe1Ta’Rrc (B’ Sri K S1Icr F ‘4Nhl’O{R Vh Ocate) Am) St T Ef Ipt3K Lv It Prau Ipal E Rear\ T Cerflni 1 1 Depai V Il N 1Iine I D C Aion \I T3Ujaii \I 1 ’1Ia B N ‘R A0 Vu]

…involving a grave miscarriage of justice having an adverse impact on public interests, In taking this view, I am fortified by the Apcx C.ourt’s judgment in the case of JASBHAI MOTIBHAI DESAI v ROSHAN EUMAR . , RAJI ASHIR AHMED AND OTHERS reported in (1976) 1 SCC 671. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are extracted hereinbelow: “49. It is true that in the ultimate analysis, the junsdiction wider Article 226 in general, and certiorari in particular is discretionary. But in a country like India where writ petitions are instituted in the High Courts by the thousand. many of them frivolous, a strict asce…