Differentiator - Judgment Search Results

The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Vs. the Mysore Spinning and Mfg ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: [1970]78ITR4(SC); (1970)2SCC202; [1971]1SCR468

..... 1 to be a valid classification it must not only be founded on an intelligible differential which distinguishes persons and things that are grouped together from others left out of the ..... 11 4 a and not under s 11a 1 683 c b the classification and differential treatment of registered and unregistered dealers are based on substantial difference having a reasonable relation .....

Nanak Chand and anr. Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: (1970)1SCC368

..... the same manner as notifications issued after that date art 14 does not strike at differentiation caused by the enactment of a law between transactions governed thereby and those which are .....

Narayanlal Bansilal Pittie. Vs. Tarabai Motilal (Dead) by Lrs.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: (1970)3SCC293; 1971(III)LC70(SC)

..... citizens the guarantee of equal protection clause of the constitution does not extend to any differential treatment which may result in the application of a special rule of interpretation between the .....

Deewan Chand Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1971All200

..... reauction of the land results in fetching lower price than earlier forest department directs the differential amount to be recovered from the plaintiff as an arrear of land revenue dues are .....

Rajpal Singh and ors. Vs. Jai Singh and anr.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1970SC1015; 1970CriLJ903; (1970)2SCC206

..... has no application in india section 3 appreciation of evidence discrepancies held court has to differentiate between normal and material discrepancies while normal discrepancies do not corrode credibility of a partys .....

Stadfast Paper Mills Vs. D.R. Kohli, Former Collector of Central Excis ...

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: 1983LC717D(Gujarat); 1983(12)ELT744(Guj)

..... found to be packing and wrapping papers the demand of the differential levy above referred to cover the period running from 30th august ..... had arisen to be determined is whether the demand of the differential amount of duty which is made by the excise department falls ..... 27th july 1962 all the different items relating to which the differential amount of duty is claimed are mentioned in the notice for .....

Dalhousie Jute Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1970Cal497

..... the petitioner towards central excise duties basic and special on the differential weight of the jute manufactures received from outside and cleared ..... on the petitioner in regard to the goods on which differential duty has now been demanded and as such the residuary ..... mills it is only challenging the demand in respect of the differential duty namely the duty on the difference in weight caused .....

United States Vs. Van Leeuwen

Court: US Supreme Court

..... to discretionary inspection a 29 hour detention of the package occasioned mainly by the time differential in obtaining information about the tennessee addressee before a search warrant was obtained caused the ..... was under investigation in van nuys for trafficking in illegal coins due to the time differential seattle customs was unable to reach nashville until the following morning march 29 when .....

Empire Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. V.P. Bhide and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 1977(1)ELT34(Bom)

..... further three sub classifications is higher the independent processors would be liable to pay the differential higher duty prescribed in respect of goods processed by them now to this extent they ..... by the petitioner company were released from its factory upon payment by the petitioner company differential duty prescribed in respect of the processed goods the release was on the footing that .....

State Vs. Chand Singh Mit Singh and anr.

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: AIR1970P& H532; 1970CriLJ1712

..... shall not be less than seven years it is obvious that the legislature intended to differentiate between mere possession and actual user of a weapon during the course of a robbery ..... 397 and the word armed in section 398 indicates unmistakably that the intention was to differentiate between the case of a person who merely carries a weapon and of one who .....