Sack - Judgment Search Results

Mattox Vs. Sacks

Court: US Supreme Court

Mattox v. Sacks - 369 U.S. 656 (1962) U.S. Supreme Court Mattox v. Sacks, 369 U.S. 656 (1962) Mattox v. Sacks

United States Vs. Sacks

Court: US Supreme Court

United States v. Sacks - 257 U.S. 37 (1921) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Sacks, 257 U.S. 37 (1921) United States

Arp Woven Sack Pvt Ltd Through Its Authorized Representative vs Union ...

Court: Delhi

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 16553/2025 ARP WOVEN SACK PVT LTD THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE .....Petitioner Through: None.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr Vinay Yadav

Century Paper Sacks Pvt Ltd vs the Commissioner (Appeal -II)

Court: Chennai

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 20.11.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and W.M.P.No.14757 of 2025 M/s. Century Paper Sacks Pvt Ltd., Represented by its Director Mr.A.M.Prakash Plot No.76 & 77, EPIP, SIPCOT Industrial Park, Gummidipoondi, Gummidipundi, Chennai

Neo Sacks Limited Vs. Cegat

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(61)ECC238; 1999(114)ELT826(MP)

ORDERB.A. Khan, J.1. Even landmark judgments sometimes generate avoidable debate. The celebrated judgment in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India [AIR 1997 SC1125], which rendered the decisions/judgments of Tribunals set up under Articles 323A and...

Neo Sack Ltd. Vs. Commissioner (Appeals) C. Ex.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: 2000(119)ELT522(MP)

Matched in: Parties Neo Sack Ltd. Vs. Commissioner (Appeals) C. Ex.

Neo Sack Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex., Indore

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: 2002(80)ECC67; 2002(139)ELT506(MP)

Matched in: Parties Neo Sack Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex., Indore

Neo Sack Ltd. (Export Division) Vs. Commr. of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: 2001(76)ECC145; 2001(132)ELT555(MP)

Matched in: Parties Neo Sack Ltd. (Export Division) Vs. Commr. of Cus. and C. Ex.

Poly Fill Sacks Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: 2005(101)ECC653; 2005(183)ELT344(Guj)

D.A. Mehta, J.1. RULE. Mr. Jitendra Malkan, learned Senior Standing Counsel, waives service of rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. By consent of the respective parties, for the reasons that follow hereinafter,...

Quality Woven Sacks Private Limited Vs. Asst. Provident Fund Commissio ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

W.P.No.16735 / 2011 (Smt. Nisha Shukla ..v ..State of M.P.& otheRs.04-07-2012 Shri Kaustubh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen, learned G.A.for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission. It is stated by the...