Famousness - Judgment Search Results

Famous Buildmart Private Limited. Vs. Unknown

Court: Punjab and Haryana

391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 AND IN THE MATTER OF : Scheme of Amalgamation of FAMOUS BUILDMART PRIVATE LIMITED...Petitioner Company-1/Transferor Company-1 AND NOBLE REALCo.PRIVATE LIMITED...Petitioner Company-2/Transferor Company-2 AND PRESENT BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED...Petitioner Company-3/Transferor Company

Famous Realtors, Operating IT’S Business as Hotel Travancore Court v ...

Court: Kerala

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1944 APPLICANT: FAMOUS REALTORS, OPERATING IT'S BUSINESS AS HOTEL TRAVANCORE COURT HOTEL TRAVANCORE COURT REGISTERED OFFICE, WARRIAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682016

Famous Construction Vs. National Projects Construction Corporation Lim ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)581; AIR2000Delhi404; 2000(53)DRJ330

ORDERVikramajit Sen, J. 1. A contract for 'production of spalls of size 300 M.M. including drilling, blasting etc. at approved quarry site, Dam site at Pambla' had been executed between the parties at Ernakulam, Kerala. Disputes...

The Famous Cine Laboratory and Studio Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [1975]36STC104(Bom)

under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, made at the instance of the applicants, the Famous Cine Laboratory and Studio Limited. The applicants are a public limited company and own a film studio and

Famous Cine Laboratories and Studios Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-t ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1979)13CTR(Bom)113; [1980]121ITR648(Bom); [1979]2TAXMAN6(Bom)

Desai J.1. The assessee in this reference is M/s. Famous Cina Laboratories & Studios Ltd. and will be hereinafter referred to as 'the company'. We are concerned in

Famous Textile Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(190)ELT361Tri(Mum.)bai

effect - "15. In view of the above findings I hold that M/s. Bhagyalaxmi Processors Industries and M/s. Famous Textile Packers are jointly and severally liable to pay the duty of Rs. 5,46,12,662/- under Section 11A...." 2.

M/S.Famous Blue Metals, Rep.by Its Sole Proprietor Mukhtar Vs. the Uni ...

Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

The Respondent/complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Dharmapuri @ Krishnagiri, alleging deficiency against the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,39,340/- with interest at 12% from the date of filing and costs. The District Forum dismissed...

Famous Cine Laboratory Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1997)(71)LC884Tri(Mum.)bai

2. A demand of Rs. 47,600 was raised against the appellants in Form DD2 on the ground that certain air conditioners obtained under Chapter X of Central Excise Rules have been resold within a period of...

Cc Vs. Famous Auto Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)(77)LC149Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Collector, Customs (Appeals), Bombay.2. None appeared on behalf of the respondent in spite of notice. In the circumstances, the appeal is being taken up...

Paramount Famous Lasky Corp. Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

Paramount Famous Lasky Corp. v. United States - 282 U.S. 30 (1930) U.S. Supreme Court Paramount Famous Lasky Corp. v.