Bombay Prohibition Act 1949 Maharashtra Section 134 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: bombay prohibition act 1949 maharashtra section 134 Year: 1987 Page 1 of about 327 results (0.706 seconds)The Municipal Corporation for Greater Bombay and anr. Vs. Shroff and C ...
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Nov-25-1987
Reported in : AIR1988Bom334; (1987)89BOMLR612
duty when the liquor is transported within limits of greater bombay but this octroi duty should not be confused with payment entry entry 51 and so also section 105 of the prohibition act which is a charging section makes a clear distinction 51 and so also section 105 of the bombay prohibition act 1949 makes a clear distinction between excise duty and countervailing reading of sections 105 and 106 of bombay prohibition act 1949 effect constitution of india seventh schedule list ii entry 51 duty arises when the liquor enters within the state of maharashtra and that is the date long prior to the date importer was liable to pay right from the enactment of sections 105 and 106 of the prohibition act must form and
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTincome-tax Officer Vs. Novelty Wine Traders
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune
Decided on : Feb-04-1987
Reported in : (1987)21ITD377(Pune.)
penalty for illegal imports of intoxicants etc as far as bombay foreign liquor rules 1953 are concerned the relevant rule 21 would defeat the very provision of law enacted for enforcing prohibition law founded on the sacred directive principles enshrined in article under section 185 of the income tax act 1961 the act 2 on behalf of the revenue shri shrinivasan explained the defeating the provisions of law under the bombay prohibition act 1949 section 58 provides that the right title or interest under cannot also be said that identical provision exists in the maharashtra statute 13 shri bhide then tried to distinguish hardi singh therefore to be examined from the point of view of section 23 of the indian contract act which states that the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTD.R. Shivappa Gowda Vs. Zilla Parishad, Chief Secretary
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-03-1987
Reported in : ILR1988KAR509
of three years under section 4 or 12a of the bombay prevention of gambling act 1887 bom iv of 1887 or act 1983 issued an ordinance called as karnataka local authorities prohibition of defection ordinance 1986 the ordinance was promulgated on 29th fines imposed by a magistrate for any offence under that act or under any rule or regulation made thereunder in any bom iv of 1887 or under the bombay prohibition act 1949 bom xxv of 1949 the commissioner the district magistrate or court in vishnu ramachandra case the state of bombay now maharashtra v vishnu ramachandra this is what the supreme court observed of the constitution is taken away by the provisions of section 1 2 of the act article 20 1 of the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTDhondiram Appa Hatkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-19-1987
Reported in : 1987(3)BomCR656; (1987)89BOMLR533; 1987MhLJ1046
vitiated the provisions of sections 56 or 57 of the bombay police act 1951 provide for an extra ordinary situation and b twice or more of an offence under the bombay prohibition act 1949 not being on offence under sections 65 66 unless the detenu is detained he might indulge in such activity in future but here the only ground alleged against the or more of an offence under the bombay prohibition act 1949 not being on offence under sections 65 66 a or own facts in the case of pandharinath v state of maharashtra 1973crilj612 the supreme court observed it is true that the b or c is called for thus the provisions of section 57 1 as well as the provisions of section 59
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTS. Nagarajan Vs. Vasantha Kumar and anr.
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Nov-26-1987
Reported in : 1988(15)ECC146; 1988(15)LC9(Kerala); 1988(34)ELT571(Ker)
..... as if made by the legislature itself section 139 bombay prohibition act 1949 authorises the state government by general or special order ..... ensues state of maharashtra v natwal lal damodar das a i r 1980 s c 593 was ..... prevention of food adultration act the full bench dealt with a notification issued by the government under sections 82 and 134 of the panchayats act and the notification involved .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTS. Nagarajan, Asst. Collector of Central Excise, Trivandrum Division V ...
Court : Kerala
Decided on : Nov-26-1987
Reported in : 1988CriLJ1217
..... made by the legislature itself section 139 bombay prohibition act 1949 authorises the state government by general or special ..... v state of maharashtra 1975crilj1862 and state of maharashtra v natwarlal 1980crilj429 relied on markings on the goods as ..... of food adulteration act the full bench dealt with a notification issued by the government under sections 82 and 134 of the panchayats act and the .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState of Maharashtra Vs. Maruti Dadu Kamble
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-01-1987
Reported in : 1988(1)BomCR620; (1988)90BOMLR4
under section 65 b read with section 81 of the bombay prohibition act 1949 the offence was triable as a summons section 65 b read with section 81 of the bombay prohibition act 1949 the offence was triable as a summons case for the offence under section 12 a of the gambling act on the same day the learned judicial magistrate ordered issue b read with section 81 of the bombay prohibition act 1949 the offence was triable as a summons case the proceedings in chapter xx of the code of criminal procedure 1973 section 254 cri p c reads as follows 254 1 if
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNamdeo Zipa Desale Vs. M.V. Chitale, Dy. Commissioner of Police and an ...
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-17-1987
Reported in : 1987(3)BomCR370
in show cause notice issued under section 59 of the bombay police act 2 the allegations made in the show cause externee has used knife in one case under the bombay prohibition act and one case of trespass and assault by first has used knife in one case under the bombay prohibition act and one case of trespass and assault by first and no 370 of 1978 kanhaya lal another v state of maharashtra anther decided on 17th july 1979 the order of externment arrest or order any person to arrest the offender under section 44 of the code that power is vested in the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTBengt Ingmar Eriksson Vs. Jamnibai Sukharya Dhangda
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jun-08-1987
Reported in : (1987)89BOMLR263
juvenile court should take assistance of recognised social agencies in bombay in case the social agencies are voluntarily willing to come home or in a community home in other words an injunction was issued restraining the adoptive parents from removing the two declaring a child as destitute pointed out contempt of courts act lxx of 1971 sections 2 c 3 one j and protection treatment and rehabilitation of children in the state of maharashtra the expression child has been defined under section 4 e mentioned directions to the juvenile courts which were authorised under section 40 of the bombay children act 1948 to determine whether
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTPrafull Dattatraya Pore Vs. J.K. Chemicals Ltd. and ors.
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Oct-15-1987
Reported in : [1989(59)FLR306]; (1993)IIILLJ129Bom
the said sub rule 1 of rule 21 of the bombay industrial employment standing orders rules 1959 i am afraid both the complaint filed by the petitioner was dismissed without any order as to costs it is against this order of the the m r t u and p u l p act in this complaint ulp no 54 of 1979 the learned thane under item l b of schedule iv to the maharashtra recognition of trade unions and prevention of unfair labour practices
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT