Advanced Search Results

Act1: finance act 2000 section 109 · Page 1 of about 498 results (0.050 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

Aug 25 2003

Modern Denim Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-25-2003

Subject : Excise

of special importance.7. Shri M.K. Gupta, learned Jt. C.D.R. also argues that in view of Clause (c) of Section 109 of the Finance Act, 2000, recovery is required to be made of all such duties of excise which … of 1962) and the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975)." 2. After the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2000 retrospectively w.e.f. 11/05/1982, the said proviso to Section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read as under:-

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 24 2002

Allied Instruments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-24-2002

Subject : Service Tax

Reported in : (2002)LC634Tri(Mum.)bai

correct." 8. In view of the above, the plea that other sections of the Finance Act, 2000, namely, Section 109, 110 and 112 relating to validation of past actions of other subject matters also provides for recovery of … the Deputy Commissioner, in view of the retrospective amendment of Service Tax Rules by Section 117 of the Finance Act, 2000, which states that notwithstanding anything contained in any judgment, decree or order of any Court, Tribunal or other

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 18 2001

Fabworth (India) Ltd. and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-18-2001

Subject : Excise

Reported in : (2002)(147)ELT478Tri(Mum.)bai

period seem to be inconsistent with the above legislative intent, particularly in view of the validation provisions of Section 109 of the Finance Act, 2000. We realise that the issue under examination is of vital importance to the … proviso to Section 3(1) of the Central Excise Act, as it stood prior to its amendment by the Finance Act 2000, reads as under:- Provided that the duties of excise which shall be levied and collected on any excisable

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Try free for 7 days How AI Brief works

Nov 13 2019

Rojer Mathew Vs. South Indian Bank Ltd and Ors Chief Manager

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-13-2019

Subject : Land Acquisition

CJI1 Leave granted. BRIEF BACKGROUND:2. In the present batch of cases, the constitutionality of Part XIV of the Finance Act, 2017 and of the rules framed in consonance has been assailed. While it would be repetitious to reproduce … adjudge the nature of a bill sought to be introduced under Article 109. Such decision was both final and hence not subject to any judicial … the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner had originally approached the High Court challenging the constitutional validity of Section 13 (5- A) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest (SARFAESI) Act,

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 21 2014

Kunal Anand Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-21-2014

Subject : Land Acquisition

frame a scheme and to seek approval of the government, before inviting tenders.67. The petitioners have relied on Section 109 of the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000 to contend that the decision taken in the meeting held … on 24.09.2004 in presence of the then Chief MinisterHousing Minister, Development Commissioner, Finance Secretary, Housing Secretary, Managing Director of Jharkhand State Housing Board and others. … wholly without jurisdiction, in as much as, Section 24(3)(b) and Section 27 of the Jharkhand State Housing Board Act, 2000 are not applicable in the facts of the present case. A further prayer has been made seeking quashing

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 21 2014