Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Defendent: n c roychoudhury · Page 1 of about 7 results (0.030 seconds)

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Mar 21 1985

Chemi Colour Agency and anr. Vs. Chief Controller of Imports and Expor ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Mar-21-1985

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 115

Reported in : AIR1985Cal358,1986(9)ECC155,1986(6)LC495(Calcutta),1987(30)ELT175(Cal)

Advocate for Respondent : B.C. Dutt and ;A.N. Saha, Advs.;N.C. Roychowdhury and ;Mihir Kumar Chakraborty, Advs.

ORDERBhagabati Prasad Banerjee, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioners challenged the validity of the order suspending the import licence as well as the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in refusing to clear the...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 18 2013

M/S. Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. Customs, Excise and Servi ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Sep-18-2013

Subject : Education

WP No.885 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE M/S.Jai Balaji Industries LTD.& Anr. Versus CustoMs.Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Eastern Zone Bench & ORS.Before: The Hon'ble Justice Harish...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 23 1999

Bata India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Mar-23-1999

Subject : Excise

Acts : Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 - Section 90 and 90(1)

Reported in : 1999(108)ELT335(Cal)

Advocate for Respondent : N.C. Roychoudhury, Sr. Adv.

ORDERAjoy Nath Ray, J. 1. This is a writ application in regard to an order passed by the Designated Authority under Section 90(1). The date of the order is 26-2-1999 and the amount determined as payable...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Jul 13 1999

Bhp (India) P. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Dir., Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-13-1999

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 110 and 124

Reported in : 2000(67)ECC37,1999(113)ELT383(Cal)

Advocate for Respondent : N.C. Roychoudhury, Sr. Adv.

ORDERAjoy Nath Ray, J.1. This is a writ application challenging a notice sent by one Amitabh Kumar, Deputy Director, to the Manager, Bank of America, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi.2. The substance of the said communication as...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 04 1998

M/S. Tirupati Trading Corporation Vs. Collector of Customs and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-04-1998

Subject : Customs

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 51, 110, 110(2), 119 and 124;; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : (1998)3CALLT32(HC),1998(104)ELT618(Cal)

Advocate for Respondent : Mr. N.C. Roychoudhury and ;Mr. Prantosh Mukherjee, Advs.

D.P. Kundu, J. 1. This appeal is arising out of judgment and order dated 23rd November. 1995 passed by S.B. Sinha, J. In Civil Order No. 8581 (W) of 1994.2. M/s. Tirupati Trading Corporation who instituted...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 03 1993

Daga Nylomet Private Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of Customs

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-03-1993

Subject : CustomsExcise

Acts : Customs Tariff Act, 1975; ;Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - Section 11; ;Central Excise Act, 1944

Reported in : 1993(67)ELT270(Cal)

Advocate for Respondent : N.C. Roychoudhury and ;Prantosh Mukherjee, Advs.

Ruma Pal, J.1. The dispute in this case is whether the machinery imported by the petitioners is a textile machine. The petitioners say that the machine imported is a textile winding machine and is covered by...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 02 2008

Puskar Raj Wason Vs. Union of India (Uoi) (S.E. Railway) and anr.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Sep-02-2008

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 15, 16, 16(1), 30 and 33

Reported in : AIR2008Cal255,2008(4)ARBLR567(Cal),2008(4)CHN477

Advocate for Respondent : N.C. Roychoudhury, ;D.K. Singh and ;S. Choudhury, Advs.

Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.1. The instant appeal has been preferred from the judgment and order dated 21st March, 2005 passed by a learned single Judge of this Hon'ble Court on the application filed by the appellant...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial