Appeals to Commissioner (Appeals)

Related judgements & precedents

These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.

1. Union of India vs Madras Bar Association

   Supreme Court of India 26 Sep 2014 Binding (Supreme Court) Reportable Madras Bar Association v. Union Of India, (2014) 10 SCC 1

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   Parliament has the power to enact legislation vesting adjudicatory functions previously exercised by High Courts with alternative tribunals, and exercise of such power does not per se violate basic structure of Constitution. However, when Parliament enacts legislation transferring core judicial functions to a tribunal, it must ensure that the newly created tribunal conforms with the salient characteristics and standards of the court sought to be substituted, including independence of adjudicators, security of tenure commensurate with judges of the replaced court, appointment procedures ensuring judicial independence, appointment of only legally qualified judges for deciding questions of law, and safeguards ensuring the tribunal is not subject to executive control or interference. Failure to maintain these standards violates the separation of powers and judicial review components of the basic structure of Constitution. The National Tax Tribunal Act 2005, by vesting in the tribunal the power to decide substantial questions of law while allowing non-judicial members, subjecting the tribunal to executive control, and depriving it of the independence characteristics of the High Court, violates these constitutional requirements and is therefore unconstitutional in its entirety.

   On this section: Examined historical pattern of appellate jurisdiction before High Courts for questions of law in excise matters

   Read the full order on eCourts India

2. Union of India vs All Orissa Tax Bar Association

   Supreme Court of India 26 Sep 2014 Binding (Supreme Court Constitution Bench - Law of the Land) Reportable

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   The National Tax Tribunal Act, 2005, insofar as Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, and 13 are concerned, violates the basic structure of the Constitution by failing to ensure that a tribunal substituting High Court jurisdiction possesses the same standards, independence, security of tenure, and qualifications required for judges of the High Court. While Parliament has legislative competence to create tribunals and transfer appellate jurisdiction, such transfer must conform to recognized constitutional conventions derived from Westminster model constitutions and the principles of separation of powers, rule of law, and judicial independence which form part of the basic structure. Specific violations include: (1) locating tribunal sittings primarily in Delhi denies litigants accessibility; (2) vesting power over tribunal jurisdiction and member transfer with the Central Government (an interested party) compromises independence; (3) allowing non-legally qualified Accountant Members and Technical Members to decide substantial questions of law violates the requirement that tribunal members possess stature commensurate with High Court judges; (4) Selection Committee composition with government Secretaries violates principle that a party's opponent cannot select adjudicators; (5) five-year renewable terms encourage members to curry favor with government; (6) allowing Chartered Accountants and any authorized person to represent parties before a forum deciding only questions of law undermines the specialized nature of appellate adjudication. Consequently, the entire National Tax Tribunal Act is struck down as unconstitutional.

   On this section: Parallel structure to Income Tax Act showing historical vesting of appellate jurisdiction in High Courts; amendment substituting appeal for reference

   Read the full order on eCourts India

3. Union of India vs P. C. Joshi

   Supreme Court of India 26 Sep 2014 Binding Precedent (Supreme Court of India - Constitution Bench) Reportable Madras Bar Association v. Union of India (2014) 10 SCC 1

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   Parliament has the power to enact legislation vesting appellate jurisdiction previously exercised by High Courts in alternative adjudicatory mechanisms (including tribunals) for specific subject matters. However, such transfer is subject to the constitutional limitation that the newly created court/tribunal must conform to the salient characteristics, standards, and safeguards of the court being replaced - particularly regarding judicial independence, security of tenure, appointment procedures requiring judicial involvement, and adequate qualifications. Where the jurisdiction being transferred relates to deciding substantial questions of law (which is a core and constitutional function of superior courts), the substituting forum cannot be a tribunal lacking requisite legal qualifications and judicial independence safeguards. The National Tax Tribunal Act, 2005, by vesting appellate jurisdiction to decide substantial questions of law relating to taxation in a tribunal lacking judicial composition, constitutional safeguards for member independence, properly constituted appointment process, and proper qualifications requirements, violates the basic structure doctrine by impairing the separation of powers principle and the core constitutional function of judicial review vested in High Courts. Therefore, the Act is unconstitutional and void.

   On this section: Historical background of appellate jurisdiction and questions of law references

   Read the full order on eCourts India

The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.