Advanced Search Results

Balbir Singh Sethi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 - Sections 2, 3 and 3(1); Customs Act, 1962- Sections 2(39), 3(1), 46(4), 77, 111, 113 and 124; Constitution of India - Articles 21 and 226; Foreign Trade (Regulation) Rules 1993 - Rule 11

Reported in : 2002CriLJ1569

application was directed to be listed on 28-11 -2001 as a First case on the board of the appropriate Bench. The matter, however, came up for hearing by this Bench on 3-12-2001 and 4-12-2001 and Sri A. … detention order bearing no. 673/80/2000-Cus. VIII dated 16-2-2001, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue (COFEPOSA ACT Section) New Delhi dated 16th Feb. 2001 (Annexure 1 to the petition). The order aforestated has been made

itc Ltd. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Sales Tax

; it is addressed to tariffs, licensing, marketing regulations, price-control, nationalization, economic or social planning, discriminatory tariffs, compulsory appropriation of goods, freezing or stand-still orders and similar other impediments operating directly and immediately on the freedom of … such legislation require President's sanction in terms of the proviso to Article 304(b)? Whether the Assam Entry Tax Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as 'the AET Act, 2001'), notifications, issued under Section 3(4) thereof, imposing entry tax on

The State of Maharashtra Through Sdpo Vs. Bharat Baburao Gavhane and 1 ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : MCOC Act, 1999 - Sections 2, 3, 3(1), 9, 11, 20, 21(1), 23(1) and 23(2); Arms Act - Sections 4, 4(25) and 25; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 324, 325, 326, 341, 394, 395, 396 and 452; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 2; Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 - Sections 3 to 5; Bombay Police Act - Sections 135

Reported in : 2007CriLJ552

a prima facie conclusion that the accused can be prosecuted under the MCOC Act and more particularly Section 3 thereof. 3. This appeal invokes appellate powers conferred upon this Court vide MCOC Act. Earlier, it was filed … in a nut shell is as under. 4. That on 18th July 2001 at about 10.30 to 11.00 hrs. in the night, the complainant Jakir … is open for the Court and the Special Judge to take into consideration such a plea and pass appropriate orders after giving opportunity to both sides. Precisely, this is what is done by the learned Special Judge.

C.C.A.P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 254, 260A, 260A(6) and 260A(7); ; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 41, Rule 33

Reported in : (2005)193CTR(Cal)74,[2004]270ITR248(Cal)

the assessee before this court and I. T. A. No. 9 of 2001 against the main order.Submission of behalf of the appellant :2. According to … Court)--POWERSModification of order of TribunalCatch Note:There is no bar on the High Court under section 260A to pass appropriate order, as would be necessary in the appeal having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. … v. Assam Travels Shipping Service (1993) 199 ITR 1 (SC), CIT v. Ballabh Prasad Agarwalla (1998) 233 ITR 354 (Cal), CIT v. Bhagwati Developers (P) Ltd. (2003) 261 ITR 658 (Cal), CIT v. Cochin Refineries Ltd. (1988) … Neeta S. Shah v. CIT (1991) 191 ITR 77 (Karn). Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 254Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 260AAppeal (High Court)--POWERSModification of order

Rahmat Khan Vs. District Judge, Bareilly and Others

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Election

Acts : Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 - Sections 12C(1), 12C(6) and 43; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 397

Reported in : AIR2001All357; (2001)2UPLBEC1762

Matched in: Citation AIR2001All357; (2001)2UPLBEC1762

Lance Naik Vinod Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Subject : Service

Acts : Persons with Disablities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 - Sections 2, 47 and 47(1)

Reported in : 2003(4)MPHT426

position to perform his duties. After his examination by the Medical Board he could be placed in an appropriate medical category. He was, however, discharged without waiting for his examination by the Medical Board on 3-6-2001. According … to get the petitioner examined on 3-6-2001 before his discharge and release.6. The Parliament has now passed an Act known as 'Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995'. Section 2(k) of

Dr. Anand Prakash Vs. the Appropriate Authority Under the I.T.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Income Tax

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 269UD

to any compensation and if so, the amount thereof if it can be quantified. R.A. is disposed of." 3. Therefore, we have to only decide the question whether or not the petitioner is entitled to any compensation. … (emphasis supplied) 9. The interim order continued to operate till 22nd November, 2001, when the following order came to be passed:- "Counsel for the petitioner … dated 7th July, 2006. By the said order, the two orders dated 29th November, 1994 passed by the appropriate authority under Section 269UD in the Chapter XX C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act, for short)

Achint Navinbhai Patel Alias Mahesh Shah Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 22, 23, 24 and 29

Reported in : AIR2003SC2172; 2002(142)ELT516(SC); JT2001(10)SC545; (2002)10SCC529

a matter of course.'3. It has been pointed out that Bipin Shantilal Panchal, petitioner in SLP (Crl.) No, 3451 of 2001 has filed 5th bail application before the High Court as well as before this Court. Other … appears that all sorts of dilatory tactics are adopted and that neither the High Court is taking up appropriate action nor the Sessions Court in complying with the directions issued by this Court repeatedly for expeditious trial. … 22 23 24 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the NDPS Act') and Sections 120A and 120B … one or the other reason the prosecution for the offences punishable under Sections 22 23 24 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

Rajesh R Vs. the Sub Inspector of Police

Court : Kerala

Subject : Education

PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION , PATHANAMTITTA --------------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S)/7TH ACCUSED: -------------------------------------------------- RAJESH R, S/O.RAGHAVAN,AGED 3 YEARS, PALAKKODU PUTHEN VEEDU,ELAMANOOR MURI, ENADIMANGALAM VILLAGE,ADOOR. BY ADVS.SRI.K.SASIKUMAR SRI.S.KANNAN RESPONDENT(S)/COMPAINANT AND … offences under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 the offences under Sections 308, 427, 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code have also … clear that the petitioner has not so far appeared before the court below also. He can resort to appropriate remedies pleading for a discharge in the matter and if a petition is duly filed the same will

Shatrughna Shravan Kamble Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 - Rule 7; Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(1)

Reported in : 2003(1)ALLMR420; 2003BomCR(Cri)1195; 2003CriLJ790; 2003(1)MhLj963

learned Single Judge of this Court by the order dated 11th December 2001 on the ground that there is conflict of decisions in the judgments … said to have been vitiated for non-compliance with the mandatory provisions unless prejudice is shown in which case appropriate orders can be passed for re-investigation as may be called for, wholly or partly, but the prosecution need … present matter arises in the following circumstances: The petitioner had lodged FIR with Dahanu Police Station under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act of 1989 against the Respondent No. 4 for insulting and humiliating the petitioner by referring