9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 307 - HC - CustomsApplication for listing the main case for an early date - HELD THAT - On advance notice, Mr. Anshuman Chopra, Advocate appears for respondent-Union of India and states that though the Department has filed a review application before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforementioned case titled as M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS 2021 (3) TMI 384 - SUPREME COURT but fairly stated that no stay has been granted and has accepted that the Coordinate Bench had decided the same issue. Application allowed.
Issues: Application for listing main case for an early date and legal issue conclusion based on previous judgments.
In the judgment delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikas Bahl of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the court addressed an application for listing the main case for an early date. The applicant-petitioner's advocate, Mr. Sangram S. Saron, sought an early listing and highlighted that the legal issue in the present case had already been concluded by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Canon India Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs-2021 and a Coordinate Bench judgment in CWP-19871-2020 titled M/s Godrej & Boyee Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India. Respondent-Union of India, represented by Mr. Anshuman Chopra, acknowledged that the Coordinate Bench had already decided the same issue despite a review application filed by the Department before the Supreme Court. The court allowed the application, and the main case was taken on board the same day. Regarding CWP-14921-2020, the court noted that the writ petition stands disposed of in similar terms as CWP-19871-2020 based on the application's averments and facts. Furthermore, any pending Civil Miscellaneous Application related to the main case was also directed to be disposed of since the main case had already been decided. The court's decision was based on the application's content and the acknowledgment by the respondent that the Coordinate Bench had addressed the legal issue in question.
|
