Search Results for "second proviso"

Trending :

Supreme Court Sets Aside Appointment Orders in Steel Plant Recruitment Case Due ...
Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals of Para-Teachers Seeking Regularisation in Jhark...
Supreme Court Allows Appellant in Karnataka SC/ST Land Transfer Case Due to Lach...
Supreme Court Allows Collaborator's Arbitration Request Despite No Privity of Co...
Supreme Court Upholds Regulatory Commission's Order Restricting Depreciation to ...

Search Results for "second proviso"

125 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 125 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Life Insurance Surrender Value Dispute — Computation of Bonus Surrender Value Must Be Based on Approved Formula Under Section 113 of Insurance Act, 1938. The Court Remanded the Matter to National Commission for Fresh Consideration After Insurer Produces the Approved Formula.

7 Mar 2019

The appellant, Anandrao Ramchandra Salunke, obtained a life insurance policy from the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) on 11 November 1993 fo...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Seniority Dispute Over Catch-Up Rule for Reserved Category Promotions. Consequential Seniority for Scheduled Caste Promotee Upheld as Regular Promotion Not Fortuitous.

5 Mar 2019

The case involves a seniority dispute between two officers of the Government of Maharashtra: Sudhakar Baburao Nangnure (appellant, open category) and ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Carrying Cost in Change in Law Claims Under PPA — Restitutionary Principle Upheld. Article 13.2 of Power Purchase Agreement Entitles Generating Company to Carrying Cost from Date of Change in Law Till Approval.

25 Feb 2019

The case involves appeals by Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (Haryana Discoms) and Gujarat Urja Vika...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B(1) Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) is distinct from the manufacturer's right, and the benefit of the second proviso (waiver of limitation for duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed a batch of appeals filed by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central exci...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim in Central Excise Duty Case — Limitation Period Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the period of limitation of six months under Section 11B(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies to a buyer's refund claim even if the manufacturer paid duty under protest, as the rights of manufacturer and buyer are distinct.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the appellant/buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise dut...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the buyer's refund claim is time-barred as it was filed beyond six months from the date of purchase, and the manufacturer's protest does not extend the limitation for the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Central Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against Extension of Time for Filing Written Statement Beyond 120 Days Under Amended CPC. Mandatory Forfeiture of Right to File Written Statement After Expiry of Statutory Period Under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC as Amended by Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

1 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court allowed an appeal against two orders of the High Court that permitted the defendant to file a written statement beyond the statutory...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Reverses High Court in Section 80-IC Tax Exemption Case — Substantial Expansion Does Not Entitle Assessee to Reset 100% Deduction Period. The court held that the fixed exemption structure under Section 80-IC(3) cannot be altered by substantial expansion, and the total deduction period remains capped at ten years.

1 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court considered a batch of appeals arising from a common judgment of the Himachal Pradesh High Court concerning the interpretation of Sec...

10 11 12 13

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)