Advanced Search Results

State of Bihar and ors. Vs. Shakti Tubes Ltd. Co.

Court : Patna

Subject : Company

payment is concerned, the respondent received payment for materials supplied to Bhagalpur district in time except the central excise duty paid by respondent over the materials but payments of materials supplied at other districts respondent did not … decreeing the suit on contest with cost.2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s. Shakti Tubes Limited Company, sole respondent, filed Money Suit No. 131 of 1997 in the Court of sub-Judge-I, Patna stating therein that

American Universal Electric (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excises Act, 1944 - Sections 3 and 4; Companies Act

Reported in : 1979(4)ELT125(P& H)

and distribution.3. The products manufactured by the petitioner Company are admittedly subject to the levy and payment of excise duty under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Section 3 of

Pollock Vs. Farmers' Loan and Trust Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Subject : Land Acquisition

Court Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429 (1895) Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust Company No. 898 Argued March 7, 8. 11, 12, 13, 1895 Decided April 8, 1895. 157 U.S. 429 APPEAL … of section 8 reads thus: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but

Laxmi Starch Limited Vs. Union of India

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise and Customs Laws Amendment Act, 1991

Reported in : 1994(1)ALT426; 1993(43)ECC1; 1993(67)ELT769(AP)

Syed Shah Mohd. Quadri, J.1. A common question regarding the constitutional validity of Central Excise and Customs Laws Amendment Act, 1991 (Act 40 of 1991) (for short 'Amendment Act') arises in these Writ … question. Facts in the Writ Petitions will be referred to wherever necessary. 3. The first petitioner is a Company registered under the Indian Companies Act and the second petitioner is a share-holder and the General Manager of

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Sudarshan Plywood Industries Ltd. an ...

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Excise

three writ petitions, the respondents writ petitioners assailed the show-cause notices issued under Rule 233-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for recovery of duties' short-levied or short-paid vide notice dated 9.10.1985 in Civil Rule No. 856 … being the differential duty as detailed in Annexure-'A' should not be demanded from and paid by the said company under Rule 9(2) of the said Rules read with Section 11A of the said Act since the said

Gujarat Setco Clutch Ltd. and Vs. C.C.E.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad

Subject : Excise

Reported in : (2007)(118)ECC425

Matched in: Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad

P.V. Beedies (Private) Ltd. Vs. the State of Mysore and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Sales Tax

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : [1963]14STC139(Kar)

beedies, possessing a licensed private warehouse as defined by rule 2(xv) read with rule 140 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, framed under the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. On 1st June, 1955, … ORDERSomnath Iyer, J.1. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act manufacturing and dealing in beedies, possessing a licensed private warehouse as defined by

Birla Tyres Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Kolkata

Subject : CriminalExcise

Acts : Prevention of Corruption Act - Section 13(1) and 13(2); ;Central Excise Act, 1944 - Section 11A; ;Central Excise Rules - Rules 52(A), 92 and 209A; ;General Clauses Act - Section 26; ;Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 6, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 397, 401, 482 and 483; ;Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B, 420, 467 and 468; ;Constitution of India - Articles 20(2) and 226

Reported in : 1998(103)ELT23(Cal)

over India. The Company has its Head Office at 53, Syed Amir Ali Avenue, Calcutta.3. The Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar issued three identical show cause notices in the name of the petitioners being No. C-V(40)

Ballapur Industries Limited Vs. Union of India

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 3, 35(2), 36(1), 38, 40, 40(1), 40(2); Limitation Act - Article 58; Madras General Sales Tax Act - Sections 8, 35 and 36; Foreign Compensation Act, 1950 - Sections 4(4); Limitation Act, 1963 - Article 100; Limitation Act, 1908 - Article 13 and 113

Reported in : 1985(4)ECC270; 1987(27)ELT414(Bom)

1972. Thereafter, the machine manufacturing board paper came to be called 'Laminating Machine.'3. Section 3 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') authorizes the Central Government to levy and collect … Limited, formerly known as 'The Ballarpur Paper and Straw Board Mills Ltd.' (hereinafter referred to as the 'plaintiff Company) and First Appeal No. 61 of 1978 is filed by the original defendant, the Union of India, in

The Karnal Distillery Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; Financial Commissioner Act

Reported in : (1965)67PLR144

226 of the Constitution by a company the karnal Distillery Co, Ltd against the State of Punjab and Excise and Taxation Commissioner.(2) The petitioner is an old established distillery company which at present operating under a licence