Rajkumar Shivhare v. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement

THE MANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., vs. SRI A CHANDRASEKHAR

Bench: G.NARENDAR,P.N.DESAI

…fidavits or statements of Government spokesmen by themselves do not form basis to grant any relief to a person in a public law remedy to which he is not otherwise entitled to in law.” 53. In Raj Kumar Shivhare v. Directorate of Enforcement [(2010) 4 SCC 772] the Court was 36 dealing with the issue whether the alternative statutory remedy available under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 can be bypassed and jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution could be invoked. After examining the scheme of the Act, the Court observed: (SCC p. 781, paras 31-32) “31. When a statut…

XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice S.G.Pandit

…h regard to maintainability placed reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in Thansingh Nathmal and Others V/s. Superintendent of Taxes [AIR 1964 SC 1419]; Raj Kumar Shivhare V/s. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement and Others [(2010) 4 SCC 772]; and decision of the High 12 Court of Madras in the case of Pradeep D. Kothari V/s. The Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement and Others [MANU/TN/0949/2018]. Thus, learned Additional Solicitor General would submit that FEMA is a complete code in itself. It provides an opportunity at the time of adjudication as well as p…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S PRASADHINI ENTERPRISES PVT LTD

Appeal is dismissed as devoid of merits

Bench: The Hon' Ble Mr. Justice B. Veerappa Regular Second Appeal No.390/2012 (Res)

…on to the facts and circumstances of the present case. 67. The another judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant in the case of Rajkumar Shivhare vs. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement and Another reported in (2010)4 SCC 772 has no application to the facts and circumstances of the present case. Admittedly, RSA 83 No.2344/2008 filed by the plaintiff came to be allowed by the judgment and decree dated 30.07.2010 and the matter was remanded to the Trial Court only to record its findings on Issue Nos.1,2 & 6. Against the said judgment and d…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 vs. M/s Devi Sea Foods Ltd.,

…r Section 35 of FEMA does not provide an efficacious remedy. In fact there could hardly be any reason since the High Court itself is the appellate forum." The Supreme Court in Rajkumar Shivhare vs. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement-(2010) 4 SCC 772, has in para 34 held as under: (27 of 29) [SAW-491/2017] “34. When a statutory forum is created by law for redressal of grievance and that too in a fiscal Statute, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation. In this case High Court is a statutory forum of appeal on a question…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income -Tax-6 vs. M/s. B.Surendra Chowdary

…r Section 35 of FEMA does not provide an efficacious remedy. In fact there could hardly be any reason since the High Court itself is the appellate forum." The Supreme Court in Rajkumar Shivhare vs. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement-(2010) 4 SCC 772, has in para 34 held as under: (27 of 29) [SAW-491/2017] “34. When a statutory forum is created by law for redressal of grievance and that too in a fiscal Statute, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation. In this case High Court is a statutory forum of appeal on a question…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. K.V.Ram Kumar

…r Section 35 of FEMA does not provide an efficacious remedy. In fact there could hardly be any reason since the High Court itself is the appellate forum." The Supreme Court in Rajkumar Shivhare vs. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement-(2010) 4 SCC 772, has in para 34 held as under: (27 of 29) [SAW-491/2017] “34. When a statutory forum is created by law for redressal of grievance and that too in a fiscal Statute, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation. In this case High Court is a statutory forum of appeal on a question…

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. New Bombay Goods Transport

…74) 34 STC 535 (Pat). 5. (1976) 2 SCC 44; 6. (2010) 4 M.P.L.J. 515; 7. (2005) 140 STC 112 (Mad); 8. (1995) 96 STC 627 9. (2014) 15 SCC 136; 10. (1990) 4 SCC 256 11. (2009) 12 SCC 735 12. AIR 2005 SC 2891 13. (2005) 4 SCC 272 14. (2006) 4 SCC 772 15. (2004) 7 SCC 377 16. (2005) 7 SCC 396 17. (2004) 11 SCC 801 18. (2011) 12 SCC 499; 19. (1969) 2 SCR 253 20. (2004) 11 SCC 798 21. (1994) Supp. 3 SCC 606; 2 22. AIR 1992 SC 152; 23. (2016) 2 SCC 362 24. (2016) 15 SCC 733 25. (2018) 9 SCC 1 26. AIR 1961 SC 65 27. (2002) 5 SCC 203 28. 1990 MhLJ 824 29. (1992)…

M/S UTTAM INDUSTRIES vs. COMMNR.OF CENTRAL EXCISE HARYANA

…1 ITEM No.1-A Court No.14 SECTION III (for judgment) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 3727-3728 OF 2005 M/S.UTTAM INDUSTRIES APPELLANT (s) VERSUS COMMNR.OF CENTRAL EXCISE HARYANA Respondent (s) Date : 21/02/2011 These appeals were called on for judgment today. For Appellant (s) Ms.Neeru Vaid, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.B.Krishna Prasad,Adv. Hon'ble Dr. Justice Mukundakam Sharma pronounced th…