Advanced Search Results
Ram Gopal Vs. State of M.P.
Madhya Pradesh
Apr-10-2000
Criminal
Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 25, 26 and 27; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 201 and 302
2000(2)MPHT353; 2000(3)MPLJ458
Paresh Parekh, Adv.
S.P. Khare, J.1. Appellant Ram Gopal has been convicted under Section 201 I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to a fine of Rs. 5000/-.2. The prosecution case was that accused Ram Gopal...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskUttam Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Madhya Pradesh
Apr-01-2002
Criminal
Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 300 and 302; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 8 and 118
2003CriLJ560
Paresh Parekh, Adv.
P.C. Agarwal, J.1. Appellant stands convicted by 7th Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhopal in S.T. No. 282/89 (State of M. P. v. Uttam Singh) under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ('Code' for short) by impugned...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskNational Plastic Industries Ltd, Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Apr-04-2001
Excise
1. The penalties have been imposed for the reason that the applicant kept a large quantity of its goods, involving duty of Rs 80.00 lakhs in place other than the premises approved under Rule 47.2. The...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Commissioner of Cus. (Ep) Vs. Virendra Kanshiram Gandhi
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Nov-12-2002
Land Acquisition
(2003)(155)ELT128Tri(Mum.)bai
1. The above applications have been filed by the Revenue for stay of operation of the impugned order of the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai by which he has confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 9,74,52,797/- against...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskNational Plastics (i) Ltd., Shri Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Dec-18-2003
Land Acquisition
(2004)(166)ELT488Tri(Mum.)bai
1. On 13.07.1999 a show cause notice was issued to the appellants proposing to confiscate goods stored outside bonded store room, though they were entered in Daily Stock Account RG1 and tallied with the physical stock....
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskParesh M. Parekh, Yogesh B. Vs. the Chairman, Securities and
SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
Oct-08-2002
MRTP
1. These four appeals are directed against the Respondent's four orders, all dated 19.2.2002. By the said orders the Appellants were prohibited from dealing in securities market for a period of two years.The factual data relating...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskVirendra Kumar Gandhi Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Mumbai
Jun-12-2002
Customs
Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 27; Constitution of India - Article 226
2002(83)ECC591; 2002LC489(Bombay); 2002(143)ELT508(Bom)
S. Diwan and ;R.M. Azim, Advs. i/b., V.G. Rege, Adv.
H.L. Gokhale, J. 1. Heard Mr. Diwan in support of this petition Mr. Rana appears for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Mr. Patel appears for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5/Respondents added in view of the...
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›