By Drinking - Judgment Search Results
Pure Drinks (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. (Asstt. Ci ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-03-1993
Reported in: (1994)49TTJ(Del)225
Estate, Bombay measuring 17,907. 6 sq. mts. In part of this plot, it had its factory, where soft drinks were manufactured and on the other part, it had residential flats for its employees. The assessed-company approached the
Pepsi Foods Vs. Jai Drinks (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1996
Reported in: 1996(36)DRJ711
been filed by 'PEPSI' for declaration, injection and rendition of accounts. Suit No.2110/92 has been filed by Jai Drinks Private Limited (In short referred to as 'JAI') against Pepsi Foods Limited for declaration and for recovery of
Kreem Drinks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner
Court: Kerala
Decided on: May-22-2014
CHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE22D DAY OF MAY20141ST JYAISHTA, 1936 WP(C).No. 12858 of 2014 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER : -------------------------- KREEM DRINKS PVT. LTD, CHEMICAL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AROOR, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER REENA.K. BY ADVS.SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SRI.ARUN KUMAR.P RESPONDENT(S):
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Royal Drink Xpurt vs Ms Central Secretariat Club
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-2026
decision: 25.02.2026 + ARB.P. 112/2026 & I.A. 1125/2026 (Delay of 138 days in Re- filing the petition) ROYAL DRINK XPURT .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Pragya Choudhary, Advocate and Mr. Nikhil Anand, AdvocatesversusMS CENTRAL SECRETARIAT CLUB .....Respondent Through: Appearance
Fizz Drinks Limited Vs. the Labour Court (2) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-2004
Reported in: [2005(104)FLR1196]; (2005)1UPLBEC595
of Accountant on salary of Rs. 1,000/- per month on temporary basis at petitioner's Company, namely, M/s. Fizz Drinks Ltd., Faridabad and was deputed to work at Meerut in the Sales Department of the Company. The salary
Fizz Drinks P. Ltd. Vs. State of Haryana and ors.
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Mar-15-2001
Reported in: [2001]123STC183(P& H)
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the orders, annexures P1 and P3, passed by the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (1)-cum-Revisional Authority, Faridabad (East) (respondent No. 3) and the Sales Tax...
Pure Drinks Limited and ors. Vs. Project Investments Pvt. Ltd. and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-07-2005
Reported in: 2006(86)DRJ482
Mrs. Surinder, Judge is the daughter of late Sardar Mohan Singh, who was the founder of the Pure Drinks Group. Mr. Parag Tripathi, learned senior counsel, states that there are two orders passed by this Court on
Manager, Jai Drinks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. ...
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Jan-31-2002
Reported in: [2002(95)FLR931]
case of the petitioner (for short 'the Company') is that it has a bottling plant for bottling soft drinks at Jaipur. Non-petitioner No. 2 was in the employment of the Company's bottling plant as waterman, who was
Jai Drinks (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-2002
Reported in: [2002]258ITR645(Raj)
remain the same, therefore, they are being heard and decided together.2. The assessee-company was manufacturing and selling soft drinks under a licence issued by Coca-Cola Export Corporation, USA. For the manufacture of the soft drinks, the concentrate
Jai Drinks (P) Ltd. Vs. Cit
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: May-28-2002
Reported in: (2002)178CTR(Raj)42
the same, therefore, they are being heard and decided together .2. The assessee-company was manufacturing and selling soft drinks under a licence issued by M/s Coca-Cola Export Corporation, USA. For the manufacture of the soft drinks, the
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »
Hover bars for counts · drag or use +/− to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free