COMNR.OF I.TAX vs. SANDY RESORTS P.LTD

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

delay of 99 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. CM stands disposed of. LPA No. 122 of 2006(O&M) and LPA No. 2327 of 2017(O&M) Since the common question of law and facts are involved in these two LPAs i.e LPA No.122 of 2006 “Ramesh Kumar Joshi v. Punjab Financial Corporation and another” and LPA No.2327

PRINCIPAL COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, SAMBALPUR vs. BINAY KUMAR JINDAL, HUF

Accordingly, this appeal fails and is dismissed

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Income Tax 30 Officer, Rampur reported at (1973) 1 SCC 633, in support of his argument that the Hearing Officer had clutched on to jurisdiction by deciding the jurisdictional facts erroneously. It was argued that the present case falls within the exception carved out by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Whirpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade

NEELACHAL I.NIGAM L. vs. ASST.COMNR.OF I.TAX

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

addition it disregarded the hallowed principle that justice must be seen to be done. The House of Lords, in recognition of this discrepancy, has now made 'a modest adjustment to the real danger test and ensured consistency between the Convention and the common law. The case concerned a leading counsel, a recorder, who had been appointed by the Lord Chancellor

PRINCIPAL COMNR. OF INCOME TAX, SAMBALPUR RANGE vs. M/S. TATA SPONGE IRON LTD.

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

delay in the clearance of the imported consignments, the appellants and its sister concern had been compelled to pay excess duty of over Rs 25 crores from August 2013 onwards. It is unfortunate and has to be accepted that the respondent authorities had compelled and forced the appellant to furnish the letter dated 6- 3-2017 thereby waiving