Supreme Court of India
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. versus TATA ENGINEERING AND LOCOMOTIVE CO., LTD. ETC.
- Decided
- 10 November 1997
- Judges listed
- S.C. SEN, M. JAGANNADHA RAO
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Citations
- Official
- [1997] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 109 · 1997 INSC 723
- Also cited as
- AIR 1998 SC 287
- (1997) 8 SCC 730
Learned from how other judgments cite this one, in their text or in the official Supreme Court Reports' lists of cases they refer to: each is cited this way by at least two judgments, and at least twice as often as any other citation to this judgment in that report. We hold no commercial reporter's text, only these citation strings.
Cited by
We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.
Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.
The Court's text
Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.
Leave granted.
p. 110, margin A
Union of India has come up in appeal against the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the Patna High Court directing the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Jamshedpur, to pass without delay appropriate final order on all the price lists already submitted by the Company. The Court also held that the price at which the Company sold the vehicles at the factory gate at Jamshedpur should be the normal price for the purpose of computation of the value of the excisable goods. The Court also held that the Assistant Collector of Central Excise could only call for relevant documents for the purpose of assessment of the value of the excisable goods. In .the facts of this case, price lists of Regional Sales Offices of Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. (TELCO) could not be said to be relevant for passing final orders on the price lists submitted by the company.
p. 110, margin A
The appellant has contended that it was necessary for the Excise Officer to examine the price at the Regional Sales Offices because two types of prices were being charged at the factory gate of the Company at Jamshedpur. It has been contended in reply that the bulk of the sales made by the Company was to the dealers; a small portion of sales was effected to sub-dealers directly for which full particulars were·furnished. Moreover, this point was not raised before that High Court when the writ petition was heard.
p. 110, margin D
In our view, this writ petition should not have been entertained by the High Court at all. The Assistant Collector is entitled to complete the assessment as he thinks fit in exercise of his judgment and according to his understanding of the law and facts. For this purpose, he can call for and examine whatever documents he considers relevant. If the Assistant Collector fails to follow any judgment of the High Court or this court, the assessee had adequate statutory remedies by way of an appeal and revision against the assessment order. The Court should not try to control the mode and manner in which an assessment should be made. If the Assistant Collector is of the view that enquiries are necessary to be made as to the price at which trucks were sold at the Regional Sales Offices, the· Court cannot stop him from making such enquiries.
p. 110, margin E
Mr. Sorabjee, appearing on behalf of the respondents, has complained that the assessments are going on endlessly and without due regard to an earlier judgment of the Patna High Court in respect of an earlier assessment A year on the very same issues. Whether the controversy raised in this case is covered by an earlier judgment of the High Court is a matter to be decided by the Assistant Collector. He will have to decide all questions of fact and law. He has to make whatever enquiries he thinks necessary for determination of the value of excisable goo1s. The High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction B cannot give guidance to Assistant Collector about the manner and mode in which the assessment should be made.
pp. 110–111, margin G
We are of the view that the High Court was in error in entertaining this writ petition. Therefore, the appeal is allowed and the judgment of the High Court under appeal is set aside. There will be no order as to costs. C
p. 111
The Assistant Collector is directed to complete the assessment as expeditiously as possible. T.N.A. Appeal allowed.
p. 111