Use Based Application - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: use based application Year: 1955 Page 1 of about 576 results (0.764 seconds)United States Vs. Koppers Co., Inc.
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-31-1955
..... the tax shall be determined by using such constructive average base period net income in lieu of the average base period net income otherwise determined under this subchapter d application for relief under this section ..... due without regard to the application for relief under 722 in doing so he found it necessary to proceed under i r c 713 using excess profits credits based upon the taxpayer s income .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTB. Lachhmi Das and ors. Vs. Panchmurti Shivalinga
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-16-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All635
..... pauper need not detain us as nothing turns on it the applicants base their contention on the first order dated 16 3 1946 by ..... of the court and it follows from this that the proceeding based on the application must come to an end as soon as the court ..... based on any sound reason this language is similar to that used by allsop j in chunna mal s case a and lays emphasis on the court view that the applicant .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTMarimuthu Goundar Vs. Ponnammal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Dec-13-1955
Reported in: (1956)2MLJ25
of notice the application will be treated as a good application though it would still be open to the decree holder
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTDr. Brijendra Swarup Vs. Election Tribunal, Lucknow and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All111
of the aboveorders no separate orders are required on civilmiscellaneous application no 854 of 1955 election issue of nomination section 100
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTH.E.H. the Nizam, Rajpramukh of Hyderabad Vs. B.G. Keskar and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-10-1955
Reported in: 1955CriLJ1590
the victims of his passion and that the building is used as a cellular jail wherein not less than 300 adult pp 17 to 19 and in para 13 of the application the following extracts from the aforesaid letter are given as
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState Vs. Beni Bahadur Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1955
Reported in: 1957CriLJ268
paid in the area concerned the district magistrate rejected the application on the ground that the applicant was not an employed
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTUnited States Vs. International Boxing Club
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided on: Jan-31-1955
..... yankees 346 u s 356 did not immunize from application of the sherman act all businesses based on professional sports pp 348 u s 241 ..... affair but that fact alone does not bar application of the sherman act to a business based on the promotion of such matches if the ..... to take of a wholly local spectacle or exhibition by thereafter using the channels of interstate commerce to exhibit them does not make .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTKunnathvelli Viswanathan, Minor by Next Friend and Brother Kunhikrishn ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Nov-22-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Mad604; (1956)2MLJ87
..... as the date fron which its provisions must be deemed to be applicable could be applied only from 5th december 1945 28 our answer therefore ..... 5th of december 1945 any landlord has obtained a decree for eviction based upon the interpretation of the phrase requires the holding as laid down ..... provisions of madras act xxiv of 1945 and the change made by using the word needs to put it in another way if after .....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTTabiruddIn Mallick and anr. Vs. Protiva Rani Devi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Mar-15-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Cal454
error in law as ext 5 on which it was based was not admissible in evidence it appears however that even suit 8 prima faice the civil court in deciding an application under sub section 8 of section 37a has to look
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTVirina Soorayya Vs. Virina Mallayya and ors.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-25-1955
Reported in: AIR1955AP229a; [1955]28ITR362(AP)
is one of limitation and the following facts may be useful for appreciating it 2 veerina venkatarathnam and some others filed munsif and on appeal the subordinate judge held that the application was barred by limitation as having been filed more than
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