Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.S.Verma, CJI., B.N. Kirpa, K Ramaswamy, JJ.
BOMBAY TYRES INTERNATIONAL LTD., APPELLANT;
VERSUS
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, INDORE, RESPONDENT.
Civil Appeal No. 1909 of 1997, decided on July 11, 1997.
ORDER
1. In spite of our earlier order dated 26-3-1997, the appellant has not produced any material to indicate that the burden of the tax was not passed on to the consumers so that the appellant could claim refund of the tax which was paid under protest on the basis of the judgment of this Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India. [(1997) 5 SCC 536 : (1997) 89 ELT 247] In our opinion, this alone is sufficient to disentitle the appellant to claim the refund after the decision in Mafatlal. [(1997) 5 SCC 536 : (1997) (89 ELT 247]
2. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
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
