2002 2 Scc33339 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: 2002 2 scc33339 Court: chennai Page 1 of about 300 results (0.4 seconds)M/s. Sri Kumaran Trading Company, Chennai Vs. The Deputy Commercial Ta ...
Court : Chennai
circle w p no 32711 of 2002 dated 28 8 2002 2 m s vardhaman steels vs cto vallalar nagar assessment revision notice the petitioner submitted interim objections on 9 12 2004 the receipt of the interim objections is not in dispute
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMohammed Ansari, Vs. the Secretary to the Government of Tamilnadu, Dep ...
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2003CriLJ524
c no 2 of 2000 had commended on 7 3 2002 and the examination of the prosecution witnesses is going on power to require the attendance of the prisoners under section 267 cr p c v kanagaraj j 13 in the above
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAshok Vs. the Competent Authority and District Revenue Officer and ors ...
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2006)4MLJ714
courts iia department dated 21 01 2002 and 13 02 2002 were received on 28 01 20025 and 28 02 2002 courts iia department dated 21 01 2002 and 13 02 2002 were received on 28 01 20025 and 28 02 2002
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Gift-tax Vs. K.M. Ziauddin
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1998)145CTR(Mad)70; [1998]231ITR645(Mad)
of the transactions in s raja ramalingam s case 1997 227itr622 mad are similar to the facts in the present case
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTFenner (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1999)151CTR(Mad)30
37 1 business expenditure allowability interest paid under s 220 2 ratio held any interest payable for delayed payment tax should
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTKrishnaswamy Vs. Inspector of Police and Others
Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1992CriLJ2998
detenus on bail hence the detention is violative of article 21 of the constitution of india and contrary to 167 2
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTG. Nadimuthu Vs. the Commissioner and Secretary
Court : Chennai
second respondent further states that the salary between 29 01 2002 and 31 01 2002 was paid to the petitioner she petitioner for wages between 01 02 2002 and 19 08 2002 cannot be countenanced 14 however in this case the petitioner
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTManagement of Thiruvalluvar Transport Corporation, Rep. by Its M.D. Vs ...
Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2005)IILLJ188Mad; (2005)1MLJ732
enforcement of security interest act 2002 c a no 54 2002 section 17 power of tribunal to impose condition relating to judgment of the learned single judge dated april 19 2002 2 we have heard learned counsel for the parties and have
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTUnion Bank of IndiA. Vs. Sri.Mehul R.Shah and ors.
Court : Chennai
in c s no 326 of 2002 dated 06 09 2002 o r d e r1 the petitioner has filed the no 3458 of 2002 in c s no 326 of 2002 dated 06 09 2002 o r d e r1 the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTDr. P. Vijayakumar Vs. Tata Finance Ltd., Represented by N.K. Vasan
Court : Chennai
Reported in : III(2005)BC474; [2005]126CompCas912(Mad)
2002 224701 dated 01 02 2002 224702 dated 01 03 2002 and 224703 dated 01 04 2002 drawn on union bank reported in padmini polymers ltd v unit trust of india 2003 1 mwn cr dcc del 38 which is as follows
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT