Ringingly - Judgment Search Results

Ring Vs. Arizona

Court: US Supreme Court

Ring v. Arizona - 536 U.S. 584 (2002) OCTOBER TERM, 2001 Syllabus RING v. ARIZONA CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA No. 01-488. Argued April 22, 2002-Decided June 24, 2002 At petitioner Ring's Arizona trial...

Ring Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

Ring v. United States - 419 U.S. 18 (1974) U.S. Supreme Court Ring v. United States, 419 U.S. 18 (1974) Ring v. United States No. 73-6969 Decided November 11, 1974 419 U.S. 18 ON PETITION FOR...

Ring Vs. Maxwell

Court: US Supreme Court

Ring v. Maxwell - 58 U.S. 147 (1854) U.S. Supreme Court Ring v. Maxwell, 58 U.S. 17 How. 147 147 (1854) Ring v. Maxwell 58 U.S. (17 How.) 147 ON CERTIFICATE OF DIVISION OF OPINION BETWEEN...

Shimoga Piston Rings Private Limited Vs. the State of Karnataka and an ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR969; [2006]144STC490(Kar)

ORDERShylendra Kumar, J.1. Petitioner is a person registered under the Provisions of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. Petitioner had been extended certain tax benefits, such as deferment of liability for a period of 8 years with...

Ring Gears India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Acc,

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. We waive pre-deposit of duty and penalty, stay recovery thereof and proceed to dispose of the appeal itself with consent of both sides.2. Duty demand of Rs. 28,34,707.33 has been confirmed and penalty of Rs....

Mipco Seamless Rings (Guj) Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Customs and

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The appeal is directed against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The brief facts are as follows.2. The appellant succeeded in obtaining a favourable order from the Commissioner (Appeals) inasmuch as, out of the...

Jer Ring Gears Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in: (2005)(186)ELT73Tri(Bang.)

1. This appeal arises from OIA No. 180/2002-C.E., dated 6-4-2002. The department has confirmed demands in terms of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act and imposed penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under Rule 173Q of Central...

i.P. Rings Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Air)

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

1. The appellants imported stainless steel wires and filed four Bills of Entry dated 8th, 12th, 14th and 16th March, 2006, The goods were cleared before 27-3-2002 on payment of duty at 40% (BCD) +16% (CVD)...

Shriram Piston Rings Limited Vs. Usha International Limited

Court: Intellectual Property Appellate Board IPAB

(Circuit Bench Sitting at Delhi) ORDER No. 13/2010 Ms S. Usha, Vice-Chairman: 1. Both the miscellaneous petitions filed by the respondent in the rectification application to accept the additional document and for amendment of cause title...

Mipco Seamless Rings (Guj.) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (1998)(102)ELT396Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The Appellants manufacture excisable goods seamless rings both unmachined and machined. On 5-10-1990 Central Excise Preventive Officers visited Appellants factory and found some rings packed in gunny bags lying outside Bonded Store Room (BSR). They...