कौन ज़िम्मेदार? KaunZimmedar

Supreme Court clarifies 'no reformatio in peius' doctrine in tax penalty case

The case concerns an appeal by M/s. Saudi Arabian Airlines against a High Court judgment that dismissed their petition challenging the imposition of penalties and interest for delayed or short payment of Foreign Travel Tax (FTT) under the Finance Act, 1979.

Appellant: M/s. Saudi Arabian Airlines; Respondents: Union of India & Ors.; Bench: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan.

  • The Court is hearing a Civil Appeal against the High Court's dismissal of the writ petition.
  • The High Court had rejected the appellant's argument that the proviso to Rule 11 of the 1979 Rules (limiting penalty to Rs. 5,000) should prevail over Section 38(3) of the Finance Act, 1979.
  • The High Court held that the parent statute (Finance Act) prevails over the subordinate legislation (1979 Rules) in case of conflict.
  • The High Court held that penalty under Section 38(3) is automatic for delay in payment and that the adjudicating authority had no discretion to impose less than the statutory minimum penalty.

Written from the document by AI, and checked against it. The original below is authoritative.

The original document

Order 2026-09-02
Tap “Open the PDF” above to view this document.
Document details
Official titleLitigant Cannot Be Worse Off For Filing An Appeal : Supreme Court Explains Doctrine Of 'No Reformatio In Peius'
Source bodySupreme Court of India — orders & judgments
Reference number
Statusclosed (order)
Year2026
Closing date
Documents1

Discussion (0)

Citizens discussing these documents. A discussion space — nothing here is verified fact or an official finding. Reading is free; sign in to take part.

Open discussion (0) →