Skip to content


Ex Parte - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: ex parte Page 1 of about 112 results (0.040 seconds)
Feb 16 2000 (TRI)

Parda Auto Parts and 5 ors. Vs. Commr. of Customs (P)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2000)(68)ECC647

In the searches conducted in their premises, the Customs officers examined the documentation of acquisition of such diesel engines and came sets of appeals are filed by the concerns and their partners who are engaged in dealing with used diesel engines. In

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 18 2007 (TRI)

Mpl Parts and Services Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu

Reported in: (2007)10STJ153CESTAT(Chennai)

1. After examining the records and hearing both sides, I am of the

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Apr 04 1978 (HC)

India Motor Parts and Accessories Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [1981]130ITR311(Mad)

shareholders of the company and the money had been actually expended for the purpose. We are not called upon in this The Tribunal, after considering the respective contentions of both the parties, dismissed the appeals, making the following observation ;'We, therefore, hold

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 11 2002 (HC)

Kovai Auto Parts Vs. Chief Cit (Tech)

Court: Chennai

Reported in: [2002]124TAXMAN346(Mad)

ORDERR. Jayasimha Babu, J. The point raised in these writ petitions is one which has been considered by us in...

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 25 2010 (TRI)

S. Hareesh, Part Time Sweeper Vs. the Superintendent of Post Offices S ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam

Mr. Justice K. Thankappan, Judicial Member The question raised in this Original Application has been considered by three judgments of...

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Sep 12 2012 (HC)

Gurudeen Parte Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court: Madhya Pradesh

month. Till then the representation is decided, status-quo, as is existing today, shall be maintained. With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed Gurudeen Parte versus State & Ors W.P.No.15058/2012 13/09/2012 Shri Rashid Suhal Siddiqui,

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 13 2014 (HC)

Ram Bharose Parte Vs. Secretary the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

1 W.P. No.9800/2010 13.2.2014 Shri Brajesh Choubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S. Bisen, learned Govt. Advocate for respondent...

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Sep 29 2016 (HC)

Daon Auto Parts (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Assistant Commissioner

Court: Chennai

filed, more particularly in paragraph No.13, the petitioner sought to explain as to why they did not respond to the pre-revision the respondent. In effect in the Writ Petitions filed, more particularly in paragraph No.13, the petitioner sought to explain as to

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jan 19 2017 (HC)

Super Motor Parts vs.commissioner Trade and Taxes and Anr.

Court: Delhi

VALUE ADDED TAX & ANR. versus ........ RESPONDENTS SUPER MOTOR PARTS versus COMMISSIONER, TRADE & TAXES & ANR......... RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 27 1991 (TRI)

Track Parts Corporation Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1992)(38)ECC155

find support in this finding of ours from the other exclusion Notes in the beginning of Chapter 84 wherein specific sub-headings hoses. The Tribunal also noted that Chapter Note 2(d) excluded parts made of hardened rubber only and concluded that if the

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

  • << Prev.

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //