Search Results for "Excise Commissioner"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Incredible Dying Declaration...
Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Under Section 182 IPC for Lack of Val...

Search Results for "Excise Commissioner"

1670 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1670 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Amendment of GSTR-1 in GST Case Due to Human Error and No Revenue Loss. Rule of purposive interpretation applied to permit correction of inadvertent reporting of wrong GSTINs under Section 37 of CGST Act, 2017.

14 Dec 2023

The petitioner, Star Engineers (I) Pvt. Ltd., is a company engaged in manufacturing and supplying electronic components to Bajaj Auto Limited (BAL). D...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Disqualification of Sarpanch for Lack of Toilet Facility — Petitioner Not a Person Aggrieved Under Section 16(2) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958. The court held that a person who is not a voter or qualified to be a member of the Gram Panchayat cannot maintain disqualification proceedings.

4 Jan 2020

The petitioner, Waghji Bhivaji Bhalerao, a resident of Gram Panchayat Khandala, filed a disqualification application under Section 14(1)(j-5) of the M...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in VAT Classification of Electric Bicycle — EBikeMatrix Held to Be a Bicycle Under Schedule Entry C14 of MVAT Act, 2002. The court held that a bicycle with an auxiliary electric motor of less than 0.5 KW and battery backup is a 'bicycle' under Entry C14, taxable at 4%, not 12.5%.

6 May 2010

The appellant, M/s R.K. Rim Pvt. Ltd., a manufacturer of bicycles, started producing a product called 'EBikeMatrix', which is a bicycle with an auxili...

High Court

Madras High Court Delivered Common Order in Writ Petitions Seeking FIR Registration and SIT Investigation into Alleged Cartelization in TANGEDCO Transformer Tenders. The Court Examined Allegations of Identical Bidding and Inflated Procurement Costs Causing Loss of Rs.397 Crores to Public Exchequer.

29 Apr 2026

The judgment pertains to three writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, heard analogously by the Madras High Court. The pe...

High Court

Bombay High Court Upholds Characterizing Order Under Section 60 of Maharashtra Police Act as Administrative; Petition to be Heard by Division Bench. The Division Bench Rules That Externment Appeal Order Does Not Involve Quasi-Judicial Determination and Thus Falls Outside 'Order' Under Rule 18 of Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960.

15 Sep 2016

The case arose from a Criminal Writ Petition filed by the petitioner challenging an externment order and the subsequent appellate order confirming the...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice and Order in Income Tax Case Due to Lack of Full and True Disclosure Finding and Non-Disposal of Objections. Reopening Beyond Four Years Invalid as No Failure to Disclose Material Facts Alleged Under Section 147 First Proviso of Income Tax Act, 1961.

27 Feb 2025

The petitioner, Crystal Pride Developers, a partnership firm engaged in real estate development, filed its original return of income for Assessment Ye...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Demolition Notices by Nagpur Improvement Trust — Delay in Execution Does Not Invalidate Statutory Notice. Statutory notice under Section 53 of Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1936 remains executable despite lapse of over two years, as no legal impediment existed.

5 Jan 2024

The judgment concerns three writ petitions filed by occupants of shops in a building owned by the Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT). The NIT had issued n...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Recovery of Customs Duty After Inordinate Delay. Demand notice under Section 72(1) of Customs Act, 1962 cannot be enforced after five years of inaction by customs authorities.

13 Mar 2024

The petitioner, Anu Products Ltd., filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Bombay High Court, aggrieved by a recovery i...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Customs Act Case — Master of Vessel Solely Liable for Import Manifest Errors. Agents Filing Manifest on Behalf of Master Not Liable Under Sections 30 and 148(2) of Customs Act, 1962.

5 Apr 2006

The case involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Customs (Imports) against M/s Patvolk and M/s Shahi Containers. The dispute arose from the arrival ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Challenging Customs Duty Demand on Imported Textile Machinery — Holds That Show Cause Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period Under Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 Is Time-Barred. The court quashed the show cause notice as the department failed to establish any fraud or suppression to justify the extended period of limitation.

20 Feb 2026

The petitioners, Karl Mayer STOLL Textilmaschinenfabrik GmbH and M/s. Karl Mayer India Private Limited, imported textile machinery and cleared the goo...

124 125 126 127 128

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