Section 3621 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: section 3621 Year: 2002 Page 1 of about 34,943 results (0.089 seconds)Commissioner of C. Ex., Vs. Lakshmi Machine Works
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu
Decided on: Jan-01-2002
Reported in: (2002)(141)ELT685Tri(Chennai)
by them to hon ble high court in terms of section 35f 1 of central excise act however the tribunal declined
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSudhangsu Sekhar Ghosh Vs. Commissioner of Customs (P)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: (2003)(151)ELT554Tri(Kol.)kata
vehicle for transportation of the smuggled goods the provisions of section 115 2 of the customs act 1962 are applicable however
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJ.K. Udaipur Udyog Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)(83)ECC503
be covered by the definition of the word factory under section 2 e of the central excise act 1944 therefore we
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMahaveer Steel Rolling Mills Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT
Decided on: Aug-02-2002
Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT274Tri(Bang.)
by the appellants aggrieved by the above said determinations a section 3a of the central excise act 1944 as it existed
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTPal Brothers Works Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-02-2002
Reported in: (2002)(146)ELT123TriDel
the submissions of both the sides note 2 a of section xvi of the tariff provides that parts which are goods
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTS.S. Enterprises Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-02-2002
Reported in: (2003)(85)ECC271
by the larger bench is a mistake in terms of section 35 c of the central excise act which requires to
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSidwal Refrigeration Indus. P. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2002
Reported in: (2002)(83)ECC317
the communication which is not a valid appealable order under section 35 1 of the central excise act ld departmental representative
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTEastern Maritime P. Ltd. Vs. Cc
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: (2002)(105)LC504Tri(Chennai)
the respondent if so desired to exercise the power under section 21 2 and pass appropriate orders 10 the learned counsel
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSigma Electronics Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-2002
Reported in: (2002)(146)ELT702TriDel
held that the assessment of the bill of entry under section 47 of the customs act 1962 is a quasi judicial
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTArchana Impex Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-2002
Reported in: (2002)(145)ELT657Tri(Mum.)bai
which was competent to transfer a matter for adjudication under section 4 of the act it was today put to the
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