Fine - Judgment Search Results

Hitaishi Fine Kraft Industries Vs. Commissioner of Customs, West

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Reported in: (2002)(148)ELT364Tri(Kol.)kata

Policy. (k) We find, therefore, no case for confiscation, redemption fine and penalty as arrived at by the lower authorities, especially

Fine Knitting Co. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1987SC167; [1986]60CompCas1083(SC); JT1986(1)SC450; 1986(2)SCALE442; (1986)4SCC276; 1986(2)LC610(SC)

one of the letters dated June 16, 1972 from the Fine Knitting Company Limited to the Additional Textile Commissioner, it is

Mafatlal Fine Spinning and Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1985)LC546Tri(Delhi)

also between M/s. Hoechest Dyes & Chemicals and M/s. Mafatlal Fine Spinning & Manufacturing Co. through Polyolefins India Ltd. and Mafatlal

S.D. Fine Chem Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1991)LC370Tri(Delhi)

brief facts are the Appellants herein manufactured Chemical laboratory and fine chemical. They are also engaged in the activity and of

Tiffany Fine Arts, Inc. Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

Footnote 1 ] The other petitioners are subsidiaries of Tiffany Fine Arts, Inc. Throughout this opinion, we refer to petitioners collectively

Eskay Fine Chemicals Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1991)LC780Tri(Mum.)bai

therein is called for. However, considering the quantum of redemption fine, the fine imposed is about 50% of the value of

Fine Fibres Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)(109)ECC110

hence the goods have been correctly confiscated and the redemption fine imposed.5. I have considered the submissions of both sides. 1

Fine Blanking Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

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

Reported in: (1990)LC188Tri(Chennai)

(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and levied a redemption fine of Rs. 2,50,000 and also a penalty of Rs. 50,000

Balaji Fine Chemicals and Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in: (2005)(102)ECC273

conducted certain investigations, which revealed that the appellant M/s. Balaji Fine Chemicals, Chittoor, were using the Brand Name "Indocol" alongwith the

Tiffany Fine Arts, Inc. Vs. U.S.

Court: US Supreme Court

U.S. - 466 U.S. 925 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court TIFFANY FINE ARTS, INC. v. U.S. , 466 U.S. 925 (1984) 466