9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (4) TMI 17 - HC - Service TaxConstitutional validity of various provisions of Finance Act, 2007 interim orders have been passed by various High Courts - SC holding that Until further orders, further proceedings in the WP pending before different HCs shall remain stayed held that direction issued by SC is binding and it shall cover not only the pending matters but also the subsequent writ petitions filed in this Court or other High Courts - present writ petition is defferred till the controversy is adjudicated by SC
Issues: Constitutional validity of provisions of Finance Act, 2007; Interpretation of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.8.2008.
In the instant writ petition, the constitutional validity of various provisions of the Finance Act, 2007 was challenged. The petitioner's counsel argued that the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court only covers pending petitions and not matters filed in this Court or other High Courts. On the contrary, the respondent's counsel contended that even if a writ petition is filed, this Court cannot adjudicate the matter as the Hon'ble Supreme Court has stayed the proceedings. The High Court analyzed the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.8.2008, which directed that all proceedings in pending writ petitions before different High Courts shall remain stayed. The High Court interpreted that the order's letter and spirit imply that no High Court should pass any order until the controversy is resolved by the Supreme Court. Despite the Bombay High Court's reference to the Supreme Court's order, it did not consider the part where proceedings were stayed. The High Court held that the direction of the Supreme Court is binding, covering not only pending matters but also subsequent writ petitions filed in any High Court. Consequently, the High Court refused to pass any order until the Supreme Court clarifies its directive and deferred the present writ petition until the controversy is resolved by the Supreme Court. The High Court granted four weeks for the respondents' counsel to file a counter affidavit and allowed two weeks for the petitioner to file a rejoinder affidavit. The case was listed for further proceedings after the affidavits were filed.
|
