Union Of India And Others Vs. Kaumudini Narayan Dalal And Another On 06 December, 2000

Q: Q. What are the equivalent citations for Union of India and Others vs Kaumudini Narayan Dalal and Another ?

The equivalence citation are(2001) 10 SCC 231 ; [2001] 117 TAXMAN 375 (SC) ; (2001) 168 CTR SC 3 ; [2001] 249 ITR 219 (SC) ; 2001 (4) SCALE 227 ; LQ/SC/2000/1948 ;

Q: Q. What was the bench assigned for the case Union of India and Others vs Kaumudini Narayan Dalal and Another?

HONBLE JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE, HONBLE JUSTICE S. P. BHARUCHA, HONBLE JUSTICE Y. K. SABHARWAL

Open iDraf

Union Of India And Others v. Kaumudini Narayan Dalal And Another

Union Of India And Others
v.
Kaumudini Narayan Dalal And Another

(Supreme Court Of India)

Civil Appeal No. 7333 Of 1996 | 06-12-2000

Learned counsel for the Revenue states that the papers before us suggest that a special leave petition was preferred against that judgment but he has no instructions as to what happened thereafter. Learned counsel for the respondents states that their enquiries with the Registry reveal that no appeal against that judgment was preferred by the Revenue

If the Revenue did not accept the correctness of the judgment in the case of Pradip Ramanlal Sheth 1992 GUJ 90 (Guj), it should have preferred an appeal there against and instructed counsel as to what the fate of that appeal was or why no appeal was filed. It is not open to the Revenue to accept that judgment in the case of the assessee in that case and challenge its correctness in the case of other assessees without just cause. For this reason, we decline to consider the correctness of the decision of the High Court in this matter and dismiss the civil appeal

No order as to costs.

Advocates List

K. N. Shukla, Maj Arora, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Advocates.

Bench List

HON'BLE JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE

HON'BLE JUSTICE S. P. BHARUCHA

HON'BLE JUSTICE Y. K. SABHARWAL

Eq Citation

(2001) 10 SCC 231

[2001] 117 TAXMAN 375 (SC)

(2001) 168 CTR SC 3

[2001] 249 ITR 219 (SC)

2001 (4) SCALE 227

LQ/SC/2000/1948

HeadNote

HELD: (Para 1) Revenue cannot accept a judgment in one case and challenge its correctness in another case without just cause, and without preferring an appeal against the judgment in the first case and without being able to show what happened to the appeal preferred against the first judgment; Revenue cannot accept a judgment in one case and challenge its correctness in another case without just cause, and without preferring an appeal against the judgment in the first case and without being able to show what happened to the appeal preferred against the first judgment. (Para 2) Revenue cannot accept a judgment in one case and challenge its correctness in another case without just cause, and without preferring an appeal against the judgment in the first case and without being able to show what happened to the appeal preferred against the first judgment