Back
2002(6) SUPREME 358
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.P. Bharucha, CJI., N. Santosh Hegde and Shivaraj, V. Patil, JJ.
Naharwar Engg. Works -Appellant
versus
Union of India -Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 16797 of 1996
Decided on 17-4-2002
ORDER
What was argued before the High Court was this :
"Sri S.P. Gupta, learned senior counsel for the petitioners contended that the value of the clearances of excisable goods in the year 1978-79 exceeded Rs. 20,00,000/- is the mainfestly erroneous view of the matter inasmuch as the clubbing of clearances of M/s. Naharwar Engineering Works with that of M/s. Ved Engineering Works is not permissible law."
What is now sought to be argued is that goods in question are not excisable goods by reason of the fact that they were, at the relevant time, exempt from the payment of excise duty. The two arguments are very different. There is no question of reading what was argued before the High Court "broadly", as was submitted, to cover the argument that is being advanced now. It is clear that it was not disputed before the High Court that the goods were excisable goods. We decline, in the circumstances, to entertain in any respect this argument.
2. We find no merit in the appeal and it is dismissed with costs.
Appeal dismissed.
**************
Parallel Citations of other Journals :
Naharwar Engg. Works v. Union of India, 2002(6) Supreme 358,
00019
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
