Same Case - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: same case Year: 1998 Page 1 of about 602 results (0.259 seconds)P.N. Chockappan and ors. Vs. the Special Tribunal for Co-operative Cas ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Oct-30-1998
Reported in: (1999)1MLJ587
..... rao chief justice in kunjithapatham v thiruvilaiyattam co operative agricultural credit society 1979 1mlj6 in case the learned chief justice has held as follows the only question for consideration therefore is ..... the co operative tribunal was not a substitute for not affording an opportunity since the same handicap which was prevailing before the original authority would continue to prevail in the .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTNestle India Limited and Another Vs. State of Punjab and Others. (and ...
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: May-18-1998
Reported in: (1998)120PLR367
..... rule 8 sub rule 2 to make a special order in the case of each of the respondents granting the same exemption because it could legitimately be said that having regard to ..... rule 8 sub rule 2 to make a special order in the case of each of the respondents granting the same exemption because it could legitimately be said that having regard to .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCollector of Central Excise Vs. Citurgia Bio-chemicals Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-04-1998
Reported in: (2002)(145)ELT114TriDel
..... we note that the issue has been decided by the tribunal in the respondents own case vide final order no 1695 96 wrb dated 22 5 96 1996 87 e l ..... that there is no warrant to interfere with the impugned order and accordingly uphold the same and reject this appeal
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTC.C.E. Vs. Dhoot Compack Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-07-1998
Reported in: (1999)(63)ECC556
the first condition which is not fulfilled in the present case this point in our view cannot be taken at this
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCollector of C. Ex. Vs. Gujarat Metal Processing
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-07-1998
Reported in: (1999)(105)ELT149TriDel
button switches 4 we have perused the records of the case and have considered the submissions we find that hsn notes
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCollector of Central Excise Vs. J.B. Mangharam Foods Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: (1999)LC521Tri(Delhi)
finds support from the decision of the tribunal in the case of parle products p ltd v c c e bombay
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJohn Wesley Peters Vs. Commissioner of Customs and C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1998
Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT976Tri(Mum.)bai
as the appellant produced the person in support of the case the appellant further has not denied the fact that the
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMardia Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1998
Reported in: (1999)(107)ELT64Tri(Mum.)bai
by the consignee no doubt in the facts of the case some evidence has been bought stating that the manufacturer has
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCce Vs. Talbros Automotive Co. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-04-1998
Reported in: (1999)(81)LC144Tri(Delhi)
disbursed to most of the buyers the department had no case at any time that cash discount was not known to
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Sundeep Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1998
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT282Tri(Mum.)bai
..... was in fact initial declaration by a letter dated 24 3 1986 for the very same input by the respondent and the commissioner appeals did not agree with the assistant commissioner ..... in the impugned order the above fact will also be a mitigating factor in this case for allowing modvat credit therefore there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>
Sign-up to get more results
Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.
Start Free Trial