Search Results for "Gujarat High Court Rules"

2592 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 2592 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Refund of IGST on Exports Under Protest, Rejects Unjust Enrichment Claim. Payment under protest does not attract doctrine of unjust enrichment under Section 54 of CGST Act, 2017.

The petitioner, Venus Jewel, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, challenging the refusa...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in MCOCA Case Due to Lack of Evidence of Organised Crime Syndicate Membership. Conviction under Section 307 IPC and Arms Act Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Conspiracy and Unlawful Activity.

The case involves an appeal by accused No.2 (Mohamad Iqbal Farooq Sheikh) and accused No.3 (Salim Aziz Shah) against their conviction by the Special J...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against Single L-1BF License for Imported Foreign Liquor in Haryana — Rule 24(i-eeee) Held Ultra Vires Punjab Excise Act, 1914. State Government's Exclusive Power Under Section 58(2)(e) to Regulate Licenses in Local Areas Cannot Be Delegated to Financial Commissioner.

The appellant, International Spirits and Wines Association of India, challenged Rule 24(i-eeee) of the Haryana Liquor License Rules, 1970, as amended ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes NDPS Proceedings Against Petitioner for Lack of Evidence of Conscious Possession and Commercial Quantity. Court holds that mere presence in a vehicle with contraband does not constitute possession under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of NDPS Act without proof of knowledge and control.

The petitioner, Mr. Kalam Narendra, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Arbitration Execution Dispute — Award Under 1940 Act Cannot Be Enforced Under 1996 Act. Court holds that arbitration agreement entered into before 1996 Act came into force is governed by the 1940 Act, and award must be filed in court for enforcement under that Act.

The appellant, M/s. Radhey Shyam Associates, filed a Letters Patent Appeal challenging the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Arbitration Enforcement Dispute — Award Under 1940 Act Cannot Be Enforced Under 1996 Act. Contractor's Award for Road Construction Work Held Unenforceable as Arbitration Was Governed by Arbitration Act, 1940 and Award Was Not Made Rule of Court.

The appellant, M/s. Radhey Shyam Associates, a contractor, filed a Letters Patent Appeal challenging the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Bom...