Page 33 - GSTL_6th August 2020_Vol 39_Part 1

2020 ] PRECEDENTS — HOW AND WHEN DISTINGUISHABLE J15

PRECEDENTS — HOW AND WHEN
DISTINGUISHABLE
By
CA Akbar Basha

In this article an attempt is made to bring out var-
ious doctrines or principles, which help a lawyer in select-
ing case laws for building a legal argument. This article
would explain various doctrines, which will help in plac-
ing reliance on case laws or to distinguish any relied upon
case law by the department during the course of adjudica-
tion or appeal proceedings.
Doctrines
(1) Ratio decidendi : It means reasons on the basis of which a decision
is given. Ratio decidendi arise from legal provisions and facts of the
case. The ratio for the decision must be derived from the reading of
the entire judgment. While placing reliance on a decision, the ratio
of the relied upon decision must be ascertained and such ratio must
be equated to the facts of our case. While citing the relied upon de-
cision, it is necessary to explain how the ratio of the relied upon de-
cision is applicable to the case in hand.
(2) Stare decisis : Is a legal doctrine that obligates Courts to follow his-
torical Court decisions, while rendering a decision on similar facts
and circumstances. This doctrine ensures binding precedents are
followed by the Courts. In case the binding precedents are not fol-
lowed, justifiable reasoning for not following the same should be
explained in the decision. Else such decision becomes per incuriam
order.
Principles of stare decisis has a binding force on lower Courts and
gives certainty and consistency in law and enables organic devel-
opment of law. Decision of Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Commu-
nity v. State of Maharashtra - 2010 (254) E.L.T. 196 (S.C.), explains this
doctrine in detail.
The judicial discipline is self-discipline and it is an inbuilt mecha-
nism in the legal system. In case of UOI v. Kamlakshi Finance Corpo-
ration Ltd. - 1991 (55) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.) strictures were passed by
Bombay High Court against department, for not following the prin-
ciples of judicial discipline, when the lower authority gave its deci-
sion, ignoring the settled principles laid down by the higher forum.
It is open for Supreme Court not to be bound by its own previous
decision, if proper reasoning is given to differentiate its own previ-
ous decision. Supreme Court based on other possible views can re-
fer the matter to Larger Bench for its decision. Supreme Court in
case of Maruti Suzuki on Cenvat credit to inputs had laid down
principles as to how the credits on inputs will be treated as eligible.
However the said principles were doubted and referred matter to
GST LAW TIMES  6th August 2020  33