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

2017 Supreme(SC) 1308

RANJAN GOGOI, NAVIN SINHA
COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX ETC. ETC. – Appellant
Versus
SELVAGANAPATHY And Co. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv., Ms. B. Sunita Rao, Adv., Mr. Anurag, Adv., Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR

ORDER :

1. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

2. The present transfer petitions have been filed on the ground that the issue involved in the Writ Petition Nos. 37511 of 2016 and 40701 of 2016 titled as “M/s. Sri Selvaganapathy & Co. vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals-I)” in the High Court of Madras is pending before this Court in Civil Appeal No.2013 of 2014.

3. We do not consider the above to be a sufficient ground for transfer of the writ proceedings from the Madras High Court to this Court inasmuch as once the decision of this Court is rendered in the afore-mentioned Civil Appeal, the same can be brought to the notice of the High Court. In the meantime, the High Court can be requested to defer the proceedings in the writ petitions pending before it.

4. In view of the above, transfer petitions are not entertained and are dismissed accordingly.

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