Active Use - Judgment Search Results

The Active Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

States - 11 U.S. 100 (1812) U.S. Supreme Court The Active v. United States, 11 U.S. 7 Cranch 100 100 (1812)

Peters Vs. Active Mfg. Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

- 130 U.S. 626 (1889) U.S. Supreme Court Peters v. Active Mfg. Co., 130 U.S. 626 (1889) Peters v. Active Manufacturing dash frame is made of metal, and is to be used in constructing a dash board for a carriage or other

Western Vs. Active Mfg. Co.

Court: US Supreme Court

Western v. Active Mfg. Co. - 129 U.S. 530 (1889) U.S. Supreme Court or buckling or injuring the dashboard. Claim 1 covers the use of a sheath furnished with a stop, which operates to

Net Pro Active Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of S.T.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

for de novo consideration. The appellants were carrying on certain activities under the category of Consulting Engineer Services. The Revenue has

Net-pro-active Services (P) Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Service Tax

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in: (2008)12STT79

Innovator, Whitefield Road, Bangalore 560066 does not have any business activity. Learned advocate referred to the CA's Certificate which is produced

Globe Active Technologies Ltd. Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2002)(104)LC443Tri(Mum.)bai

air conditioner. They are obviously intended to be for that use and cannot be put to any other use.

Net Pro Active Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Service Tax

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in: (2007)11STT23

1. The appellants are required to pre-deposit Service Tax of Rs. 18,99,196/- for the year 2000-2001 and another amount of...

Active International Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of amount of Service Tax of Rs. 39,841/- and penalties....

Active Finstock (P.) Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court: SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in: (2008)83SCL154SAT

say that the said circular was violated when the appellant used the aforesaid amount. We do not think so. The learned

Gomzi Active Vs. Reebok India Co. and anr.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 2007(1)AWC771(SC); JT2007(3)SC216; LC2007(1)360; 2007(34)PTC161(SC); 2007(2)SCALE532; (2007)10SCC632; 2007(1)LC0193(SC)

is its distinctive style and design at least since 1998, used on garments which were stolen/pirated by the defendant thus infringing