Skip to content

Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Colourtex

Decided On : Dec-06-2005

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

LAW: Section 129A, the Customs Act, Section 129C(5, the Customs Act, Section 113(d, the Customs Act, Section 13

CARDINAL: 1, two, one, 5, 22, 25, 12,800/-, 1, 2, two, two, one

ORG: the Commissioner of Customs, the Member (Technical, Member (Technical, Special Leave Application, Tribunal, the High Court, the Special Leave Application, MA/2981/05.MA/3100.05, Bench, the Appellate Tribunal, the Appellate Tribunal, Learned Senior Counsel, Tribunal, CC, Ahmedabad v.Shipping Corporation of India Ltd., R.K. Motors, Bombay v. CC, ELT, Member (Technical, the Member (Technical, the Allahabad High Court, CIT Bihar, Judicial, the High Court, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, the High Court, Judicial, Member (Technical, the Allahabad High Court, The High Court, Bench, The High Court, M/s. Colourtex

DATE: 26.12.2003, 20th October, 2005, 11th of November, 2005, October, 2005, 1988

GPE: Mumbai, India, Bombay, Birendra, Hanutram Chandanmul v., Birendra, Birendra

NORP: Hon'ble, Hon'ble, Hon'ble, ITAT, Hon'ble

ORDINAL: third, third, third, 10th, 24th, first, third, third, third, third, third, first, third, third, third, third, third, first, second, third, third, third, third, third, third, third, third

PRODUCT: Consultant, 727

PERSON: Kumar Rai v.UOI, Orissa, Amar Pal Singh v. Election Commission, Kumar Rai, Kumar Rai

FAC: the Writ Petition

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //