The Division Bench dismissed an intra-Court appeal challenging an interim order that suspended the effect and communication of an assessment order under the Black Money Act while a writ petition questioning the Act's validity was pending.
Appeal and connected application (IA No. CAN 1 of 2024) dismissed; no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Form No. J.(2) Item No.7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE
HEARD ON: 16.07.2024
DELIVERED ON: 16.07.2024
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE MR. CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
F.M.A. 547 of 2024 With IA No. CAN 1 of 2024
Pawan Kumar Ruia Versus Union of India & Ors.
Appearance:Mr. Rishi Raju Mr. Suvranil Saha
..…For the Appellant
Mr. Soumen Bhattacharya
…..For the Respondents
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, C.J.)
2
deemed to be valid. Therefore, a mere challenge to the provisions of an enactment and the pendency of the writ petition cannot operate as an automatic stay of the assessment proceeding under the relevant enactment.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM)
I agree.
(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)
Pallab/Krishnendu AR(Ct.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Single Bench committed an error in exercise of discretion in granting interim protection pending the validity challenge.
Whether suspension of assessment proceedings is necessary merely because an enactment is challenged in a pending writ petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pawan Kumar Ruia
Union of India
T.S. Sivagnanam
Hiranmay Bhattacharyya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
