Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

General Manager, Bsnl Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise

General Manager, Bsnl vs Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Karnataka Decided Feb 14, 2007
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/388757

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Karnataka High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Writ Petition No. 13936/2006
Subject
Service Tax
Disposition
Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- KARNATAKA LAW OFFICERS (APPOINTMENT AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE) RULES, 1977. Rule 29(3): [Cyriac Joseph, C.J.& B.S. Patil,J] Consultation with the District Judge -Whether the opinion of the District Judge will have a binding force on the Government ? Held, What is required under Rule 26(3) is consultation with the ...

Key legal issue
Service Tax
Outcome / disposition
Petition dismissed
Acts & sections
Finance Act, 1994 - Sections 85

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

General Manager, Bsnl

Advocate Ravi and Ravi, Adv.

Respondent

Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Acts
Finance Act, 1994 - Sections 85
Reported In
2009[16]STR262

Excerpt

- karnataka law officers (appointment and conditions of service) rules, 1977. rule 29(3): [cyriac joseph, c.j.& b.s. patil,j] consultation with the district judge -whether the opinion of the district judge will have a binding force on the government ? held, what is required under rule 26(3) is consultation with the district judge and that the opinion of the district judge is not stated to be binding on the government. but the government is bound to consider the remarks of the district judge. the government cannot dispense with the consultation itself. cyriac joseph, c.j.1. having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having considered the averments in the writ petition, we do not find any merit in the writ petition. we are in complete agreement with the view taken by the customs, excise and service tax appellate tribunal in annexure-'a' order that in view of the provisions contained in section 85 of the finance act, 1994, it was beyond the power of the lower appellate authority to condone the delay of 2 years and 2 months involved in the filing of the assessee's appeal.2. hence the writ petition is dismissed.

Full Judgment

Cyriac Joseph, C.J.

1. Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and having considered the averments in the Writ Petition, we do not find any merit in the Writ Petition. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in Annexure-'A' order that in view of the provisions contained in Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, it was beyond the power of the lower Appellate Authority to condone the delay of 2 years and 2 months involved in the filing of the assessee's appeal.

2. Hence the Writ Petition is dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial