Section 3621 - Judgment Search Results

Gokuldas Exports Vs. JaIn Exports (P) Ltd.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 2003(90)ECC806; 2003(157)ELT243(SC); JT2003(Suppl1)SC14; 2003(7)SCALE242; (2003)10SCC338

arun kumar j 1 this appeal is directed against the judgment of the high court dated 24th january 1996 confirming...

Jawala Singh Vs. Parkash Kaur @ Parkash Rani and ors.

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: (2003)135PLR850

..... must follow unless the case is covered by the explanation appended to section 10 of the specific relief act 1963 the learned counsel has further ..... time barred 9 it is also well settled that this court under section 100 of the code would not interfere in the findings of facts ..... v narayan gundoji chavan and ors a i r 2000 supreme court 3621 he has proved that he was ready and willing to perform his .....

Galaxy Agrico Exports Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT904Tri(Mum.)bai

has been paid on such inputs under the provision of section 3a of the central excise act that explanation to notification

Wimco Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT774Tri(Mum.)bai

of communication is clearly wrong by applying the provisions of section 9 of the general clauses act 1897 the date of

Shree Gauri Fashions Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

court has struck down these rules being ultra vires of section 3a of the act imposition of penalty is not sustainable

Auto Hire Purchase Finance Co. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2004)(166)ELT81TriDel

5 that being so no seizure of the truck under section 115 could be ordered apart from this the appellants are

Sony Music Entertainment (i) Pvt. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(156)ELT367Tri(Mum.)bai

departmental representative raises that by application of note 6 to section xvi of the tariff the process undertaken by the applicant

Aditya Cement Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(89)ECC650

considering the income tax act provisions for investment allowance under section 32a 1 of the income tax act those decisions are

Vijay Kumar Chetlani Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Calcutta

Reported in: (2003)(156)ELT601Tri(Kol.)kata

found to be not sufficient even then the confiscation under section 111 d of the customs act were not warranted similarly

Indian Valve Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

beyond the period of 90 days 60 days prescribed in section 35 of the act and further period of 30 days