SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 509

SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, S. P. BHARUCHA, N. S. HEGDE
Naharwar Engineering Works – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top