Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: insecticides act 1968 section 26 notification of poisoning Court: mumbai Page 28 of about 276 results (0.201 seconds)

Prism Cement Limited, (Formerly Known as H and R Johnson (India) Limit ...

Court : Mumbai

..... object of the amendment viz. to discourage the sales to unregistered dealers. this error of the draftsman has been corrected by deleting the words 'or sub-section 2' by finance act 2007 which is purely clarificatory in nature. accordingly, it is contended that since the object of 2002 amendment is to discourage sales to unregistered dealers, the ..... petitioners in respect of sales in the course of inter-state trade or commerce to dealers other than the registered dealers / government after the amendment of section 8(5) by finance act 2002. challenging the trade circulars issued by the commissioner and also the proceedings initiated pursuant thereto, the present writ petition is filed. 19. we have ..... and not in respect of sales of goods to any person or persons covered under section 8(2) of the cst act. 24. relying on the decisions of the apex court in the case of state of madras v/s. n.k. nataraja mudaliar reported in (1968) 22 stc 376 (s.c.) and video electronics private limited v/s. state .....

Collector of Customs Vs. Hargovindas and Co.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1987)(29)ELT975Tri(Mum.)bai

..... heard the appeal earlier at bombay, the president has assigned the matter to us for hearing and disposal under sub-section(5) of section 129c of the customs act, 1962.26. since each of our learned brothers at bombay had formulated the points of difference separately, under ..... of the goods and a penalty of rs. 15,000/- on the importers. the importers filed an appeal under old section 128 of the customs act to the board who vide their order no.999-1000 of 1980 under f. nos. 381/236/79-au(b) and ..... with the present imports and hence the govt. should not have exercised the powers vested in them under old section 131(3) of the customs act. accordingly shri nankani submitted that the present appeal by the collector of customs bombay before the tribunal should be rejected ..... court's decisions in the case of dcm air 1963 sc 791-1977 elt (j 199) and south bihar sugar mills air 1968 sc 922-1978 elt (j 366) s.c. the supreme court prescribed the market nomenclature as the criterion for the levy of .....

Sanjeet Shukla and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court : Mumbai

..... june 2013; (d) there is no material placed on record that the bapat commission report was placed before the maharashtra legislative assembly in terms of section 15 of the 2005 act. this was, despite the statements made by the state in public interest litigation no.126 of 2009, which are reflected in the orders dated 12 ..... proportion of population of backward classes to the total population would certainly be relevant. he further pointed out that article 16(4) which protects interests of certain sections of society has to be balanced against article 16(1) which protects the interests of every citizen of the entire society. they should be harmonised because ..... in a routine manner on prorogation of session of the state legislature. for instance, the bihar sugarcane (regulation of supply and purchase) ordinance, 1968 was first promulgated on 13 january 1968 and re-promulgated 39 times till august 1981. thus, the life of ordinance was continued for 14 years without placing it even once before the .....

Second Income-tax Officer Vs. Bisleri (i) (P.) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1985)12ITD116(Mum.)

..... , respectively (copies of the orders on record), to show that the sales tax tribunal, which is like this tribunal, a second appellate authority tinder the bombay sales tax act, considers penalty imposed under section 36(3) as something like interest only.7. shri missir, who appeared for champion engg. works (p.) ltd., submitted that his arguments with regard to the interest paid ..... under the insurance act are identical. according to him, the decision of the supreme court in the case of haji aziz & abbul shakoor bros, (supra) has to be understood in the manner in which it has been understood by a number of high courts, including the bombay high court in the case of cit v.pannalal narottamdas & co. [1968] 67 itr 667 .....

Niphad Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and Others Vs. State of Maharasht ...

Court : Mumbai

..... and paid the purchase tax on the purchase price. however, disregarding the submissions of the petitioners, the orders of assessment were passed under section 7 of the act. since the stand of the respondent was unsupported by any law, the present petition was submitted challenging those orders of assessment along-with the ..... the manufacture or production of sugar including khandsari sugar ? were substituted for the words the manufacture of sugar ? by maharashtra act 60 of 1974. section 1 provides that this act will extend to the whole maharashtra. section 2 contains definitions and we are concerned with the definition of the terms factory ?, licence ?, occupier ?, prescribed ? and ..... commissioner of commercial taxes, (2006) 139 stc 413 (kar.). (vi) p. s. n. s. ambalavana chettiar and co. ltd. and anr. vs. express newspapers ltd., air 1968 sc 741. (vii) the state of orissa vs. utkal distributors (p) ltd., (1966) 17 stc 320 (sc). (viii) thiru arooran sugars ltd. vs. deputy commercial tax officer .....

Alpha Associates Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in : (1995)52ITD640(Mum.)

..... is to be taxed. the third member held that this amount is to be taxed under the head 'capital gains'.15. adverting to the provisions of section 19 of the bombay rent (control) act, it was stated that if a person surrenders his tenancy rights for a consideration - both the giver and the taker are liable to be prosecuted and ..... mahanagar telephone nigam ltd. (hereinafter called "mtnl") amounting to rs. 1,18,66,907. this amount was arrived at after claiming deduction under section 48(2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter called the "act"). thus the income disclosed for the year was under two heads, viz. business loss and the profit under the head capital gains. the net ..... land, the agreement was not forbidden by law. it is not falling within the ambit of section 23 of the indian contract act, 1872. shri harish further relied on the decision of the apex court rendered in the case of satappa v. appaya air 1968 sc 358 (sic) wherein it was held that "an agreement to sell land does not under .....