UNION OF INDIA Vs. GODHAWANI BROTHERS
LAWS(SC)-1997-1-19
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on
January 31,1997
UNION OF INDIA
Appellant
VERSUS
GODHAWANI BROTHERS
Respondents
Cited Judgements :-
ACPE INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD. VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS [LAWS(APH)-2018-7-50] [REFERRED TO]STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. MAHAVEER OIL INDUSTRIES [LAWS(SC)-1999-4-156] [REFERRED]
J K J K UDAIPUR UDYOG LTD VS. STATEJ K UDAIPUR UDYOG LTD [LAWS(RAJ)-2001-12-6] [REFERRED TO]
GENERAL MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM VS. JACOB KOCHUVARKEY KALLIATH DEATH [LAWS(SC)-2003-4-105] [REFERRED]
SHREE DURGA ROILER FLOUR MILLS P LTD VS. STATE CF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1998-7-85] [REFERRED TO]
K C PAINT FACTORY VS. STATE OF J&K [LAWS(J&K)-2002-7-28] [REFERRED TO]
JAI PRAKASH ASSOCIATES LIMITED THRU RAHUL KUMAR VS. STATE OF U.P. THRU INSTITUTIONAL FINANCE AND ANR. [LAWS(ALL)-2010-3-330] [REFERRED TO]
KASHMIR SPICES VS. STATE OF J&K [LAWS(J&K)-1999-8-21] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. VENKATESH INDUSTRIES AND OTHERS VS. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, INDUSTRY & EMPLOYMENT AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-6-86] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. MAHAVEER OIL INDUSTRIES [LAWS(SC)-1999-4-33] [REFERRED]
J K UDAIPUR UDYOG LTD VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2001-3-46] [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF PUDUCHERRY DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS VS. DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS; PADMAVATHI MODERN RICE MILL; SATKHI MODERN RICE MIKIL; THILLAI MODERN RICE MILL; PARAMESWARI MODERN RICE MILL; LAKSHMINARAYANA MODERN RICE MILL; PANDURAJGA MODERN RICE MILL; ANGALAPARAMESWARI MOD [LAWS(MAD)-2016-7-249] [REFERRED]
JINDAL DRUGS LTD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-1-107] [REFERRED TO]
PACIFIC HEALTH CARE PVT LTD VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(ST)-2000-5-1] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)This appeal by special leave is against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dated 14th August, 1987 in Appeal No. 687 of 1984 by which the appeal of the assessee (respondent herein) was allowed setting aside the judgment of the learned single Judge which had dismissed the assessee's writ petition.
(3.)The only question for decision before the High Court was the availability of the plea of promissory estoppel to a party against issue of a notification in exercise of the statutory powers superseding the exemption from duty or tax granted earlier for a specified period. The learned single Judge held against the assessee but the Division Bench of the High Court decided in the assessee's favour.
(2.)This appeal by special leave is against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dated 14th August, 1987 in Appeal No. 687 of 1984 by which the appeal of the assessee (respondent herein) was allowed setting aside the judgment of the learned single Judge which had dismissed the assessee's writ petition.
(3.)The only question for decision before the High Court was the availability of the plea of promissory estoppel to a party against issue of a notification in exercise of the statutory powers superseding the exemption from duty or tax granted earlier for a specified period. The learned single Judge held against the assessee but the Division Bench of the High Court decided in the assessee's favour.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.