Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Commissioner vs 5.2006 Did Not Have Retrospective ...

High Court Of Gujarat|25 June, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)
1. We have heard Mr.Y.N.Ravani, learned counsel appearing for the appellant.
2. Admit.
We formulate the following substantial questions of law.
1. Whether the CESTAT, WZB, Ahmedabad has erred in not holding that the amendment introducing the explanation dated 1.5.2006 had expanding effect on Section 65(106) of the Finance Act, 1994?
2. Whether the CESTAT, WZB, Ahmedabad is right in holding that the explanation dated 1.5.2006 did not have retrospective effect and further erred in not considering the case laws of M/s WPIL Ltd. and M/s Indian Tobacco Association ?
3. Issue notice to the respondent. Paper book be filed within three months.
Order on Civil Application Any order passed by the Tribunal shall be subject decision of this Tax Appeal. Civil Application stands disposed of.
(V.M.SAHAI,J) (N.V.ANJARIA,J) ***vcdarji Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Commissioner vs 5.2006 Did Not Have Retrospective ...

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
25 June, 2012