Rules or regulation cannot be made to supplant the provisions of the enabling Act, but to supplement it. What is permitted is the delegation of ancillary or subordinating legislative functions, or what is fictionally called, a power to fill up details.
Supreme Court held that the CBEC circular was not contrary to the intent of the Central Excise Act and Rules. Thus, the show cause notice is not defective and unenforceable. However, the order of the Commissioner regarding the value of the goods sold to the Assessee’s sister concerns is in consonance with the Court’s earlier judgments and CBEC Circular.
Allahabad High Court: In a public interest litigation filed by a Non-Governmental Organization (‘NGO') for restraining the Regulatory Commission from
Authority for Advance Ruling (Karnataka): In an application filed to sought advance ruling regarding the classification of the applicant’s product,
Supreme Court: In the case where the constitutionality of two Central Government notifications related to levy of Integrated Goods and Services Tax
by Tarun Jain†
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 30
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Dr. DY Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra and KM Joseph, JJ has held that with the change in
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench of D.N. Patel, CJ and Prateek Jalan, J., while addressing a Public Interest Litigation, held that,
Calcutta High Court: Shekhar B. Saraf, J., while allowing the present petition held that, “Lawyer using a domestic space as his chamber
Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL): A Division Bench of Manjula Chellur, J. (Member) and S.D. Dubey, (Technical Member) passed an order for