Explicitness - Judgment Search Results

Cce Vs. Explicit Trading and Marketing

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(95)ECC679

..... 2003 by which the commissioner appeals has allowed modvat credit to the respondents m s explicit trading amp marketing p ltd 2 when the matter was called noone was present on .....

M/S Explicit Leathers Vs. Lal Bahadur and Ors

Court: Delhi

..... new delhi date of decision march 27 2015 lpa4752014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and ..... vijay chandra jha and ms sonia sharma advocate lpa5042014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and ..... and ms sonia sharma advocate for r 2 lpa5052014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and .....

M/S Explicit Leathers Vs. Phool Babu and Ors

Court: Delhi

..... new delhi date of decision march 27 2015 lpa4752014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and ..... vijay chandra jha and ms sonia sharma advocate lpa5042014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and ..... and ms sonia sharma advocate for r 2 lpa5052014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and .....

M/S Explicit Leathers Vs. Sharma Prasad and Ors

Court: Delhi

..... new delhi date of decision march 27 2015 lpa4752014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and ..... vijay chandra jha and ms sonia sharma advocate lpa5042014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and ..... and ms sonia sharma advocate for r 2 lpa5052014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and .....

M/S Explicit Leathers Vs. Phool Chand Verma and Ors

Court: Delhi

..... new delhi date of decision march 27 2015 lpa4752014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and ..... vijay chandra jha and ms sonia sharma advocate lpa5042014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and ..... and ms sonia sharma advocate for r 2 lpa5052014 m s explicit leathers represented by appellant mr sameer jain mr ekank mehra and .....

M/S Explicit Leathers Vs. Arvind Kumar and ors

Court: Delhi

..... for r1 w p c 1014 2014 cm no 2067 2014 m s explicit leathers petitioner through mr sandeep bajaj mr siddharth jain mr sameer jain ..... for gnctd w p c 1015 2014 cm no 2069 2014 m s explicit leathers petitioner through mr sandeep bajaj mr siddharth jain mr sameer jain ..... for gnctd w p c 1110 2014 cm no 2311 2014 m s explicit leathers petitioner through mr sandeep bajaj mr siddharth jain mr sameer jain .....

Ashcroft Vs. Free Speech Coalition

Court: US Supreme Court

..... the cpp a computer generated images virtually indistinguishable from real children engaged in sexually explicit conduct neither actual conduct nor simulated conduct however is properly construed to reach ..... promoted as conveying the impression that they depict actual minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct do not escape regulation merely because they might warrant first amendment protection .....

Just Rights For Children Alliance Vs. S. Harish

Court: Supreme Court of India

..... unless the context otherwise requires da child pornography means any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a child which include photograph video digital or computer generated image ..... is that he downloaded and enjoyed material depicting children in obscene indecent and sexually explicit manner from the application called telegram in order to attract the offence under .....

Cannon Vs. University of Chicago

Court: US Supreme Court

..... to be enforced but also upon the clear compatibility despite the absence of an explicit legislative mandate between private enforcement and the legislative purpose demonstrated in the statute ..... individuals allegedly discriminated against be admitted to federally assisted educational programs but does not explicitly foreclose the possibility of a suit against either a recipient institution or a .....

Dalia Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

..... eavesdropping equipment is not unlawful merely because the court approving the surveillance did not explicitly authorize such an entry affirming petitioner s conviction the court of appeals rejected his ..... and directing a private company to lend its assistance in that endeavor again no explicit statutory authority existed for either order despite congress otherwise comprehensive treatment of wire .....