Skip to content


T - Judgment Search Results

Home > Cases Phrase: t Page 1 of about 13,335 results (0.053 seconds)
Feb 25 1999 (SC)

T. A. Vs. Trust Alleppey V. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: (1999)152CTR(SC)439

submitted that if we were to accept the correctness of the impugned judgment, the functioning of the Tribunals would be destroyed.

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jul 09 2003 (TRI)

Cce Vs. T

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

Reported in: (2003)(89)ECC448

57G and submits that there is no due compliance of the Rules and Modvat Credit cannot be taken on documents other

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

May 28 2018 (HC)

A vs.t

Court: Delhi

parties are negotiating settlement during the pendency of a matter, then the Court will condone the delay in filing of written

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jan 06 1996 (TRI)

Cc Vs. T

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

Reported in: (1996)(65)LC322Tri(Chennai)

for loading the invoice and we find no infirmity in the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) in this

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Aug 22 1997 (TRI)

T Vs. Suzuki Limited

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

Reported in: (1999)(112)ELT173Tri(Chennai)

circumstances of this case. But that is not to say that the appellants are not liable to penalty. We observe the

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Feb 06 2004 (TRI)

T Vs. Electronics Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT

Reported in: (2004)(167)ELT155Tri(Bang.)

data. Whether it fulfils second part of the description of the tariff entry 84.71 or not for classifying the item under

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Nov 20 1996 (TRI)

T Vs. Suzuki Ltd.

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

Reported in: (1997)(92)ELT386Tri(Chennai)

has urged that the appellants are liable to penalty and the penalty levied cannot be considered as excessive.5. We have considered

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Jun 22 2009 (FN)

Forest Grove School Dist. Vs. T. A.

Court: US Supreme Court

may or must be excused.[ Footnote 7 ] Looking primarily to clauses (i) and (ii), the School District argues that Congress

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Mar 11 1938 (PC)

T.R. Pratt (Bombay) Limited Vs. M.T. Limited

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1938)40BOMLR1109

at 5 p.m., and the other at 5-15 p.m. At the first the board of Pratts resolved upon the execution of

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

Oct 29 1996 (SC)

H.M.T. Ltd. Vs. H.M.T. Head Office Employees' Assocn. and others

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 1996IXAD(SC)108; AIR1997SC585; [1997(75)FLR29]; JT1996(10)SC64; 1996(7)SCALE898; (1996)11SCC319; [1996]Supp8SCR69

1978 settlement?2. If so, what should be the quantum and the period for which such quantum is to be paid in

Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT

  • << Prev.

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //