9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 1340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") in favour of the writ petitioner. Under section 9 of the Act an appeal lies against the said order and there is no dispute with regard to the same before us. 3.. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, however, is that since in another writ petition [being Writ Petition No. 741 of 2001 (Tax)], P.N.C. Construction Company Limited v. State of U.P., a Division Bench of this Court has passed the interim order, a similar order should be passed in the instant matter as well. The interim order passed in the aforesaid writ petition is set out herein below: "Learned standing counsel may file counter-affidavit within a month. Issue notice to respondents Nos. 4 and 5 returnable at an early da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can be quoted for a proposition that may seem to follow logically from it. Such a mode of reasoning assumes that the law is necessarily a logical code, whereas every lawyer must acknowledge that the law is not always logical at all.' " 5.. In Virjiban Dass Moolji v. Biseswar Lal Hargovind reported in AIR 1921 Cal. 169, Ashutosh Mookerjee, acting as Chief Justice speaking in a division Bench of the Calcutta High Court held that a decision of a superior court is binding on an inferior court and on court of co-ordinate jurisdiction provided it contains reasons and principles of law and the same is binding to the extent the reasons and principles of law are laid down therein. In the aforesaid decision reference was also made to the judgment a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, admittedly, the order impugned is neither without jurisdiction nor in violation of principles of natural justice as it appears from the impugned order that notices were duly served on the petitioner and, therefore, he ought to have exhausted the statutory remedy available to him by way of appeal before invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. 9.. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, has however, submitted that the circular dated January 17, 2001, issued by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Trade Tax) having been issued contrary to law, the impugned order is also contrary to law since it is based on the circular. That apart, Mr. Kesawarwani, learned Standing Counsel has also made it clear to us that the impugned order is not based on any cir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
