KAHC010422252008_1
17 Dec 2014...
Search Results for "residual provision"
222 result(s) found
Found 222 result(s)
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Validates Sub-Classification of Scheduled Castes in Landmark Judgment. Upholding Equality Within Equality: Supreme Court Endorses State's Power to Sub-Classify Scheduled Castes for Targeted Reservation.
1 Aug 2024The Supreme Court of India, in a significant ruling, has upheld the constitutionality of sub-classifying Scheduled Castes for the purpose of reservati...
- 492
High Court
Madras High Court Dismisses Appeal Challenging Land Acquisition for Railway Project Under Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 — Procedural Infirmities Not Established.
22 Jun 2026The appellant, Sampath, owned lands in Veppasennampatti Village, Harur Taluk, Dharmapuri District, which were sought to be acquired under the Tamil Na...
- 22
High Court
Karnataka High Court Hears Writ Petition by State Transmission Utility and Load Dispatch Centre Against Central Electricity Regulatory Commission's Order Striking Down a Condition in Open Access Clearance. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission held that Regulation prevails over administrative condition, but State Load Dispatch Centre argues its statutory function under Sections 31 and 32 of Electricity Act, 2003 is being overridden.
22 May 2023The writ petition was filed by the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation (KPTCL) and the State Load Dispatch Centre (SLDC) under Articles 226 and 2...
- 17
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Arbitration Petition and Sets Aside Arbitral Award for Violation of Natural Justice and Patent Illegality. Denial of opportunity to cross-examine key witness and failure to consider crucial evidence renders award liable to be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
20 Aug 2025The dispute arose out of a contract between Unique Integrated Transport And Management Consultancies Pvt. Ltd. (petitioner) and Mahanagar Telephone Ni...
- 65
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Challenging Demand of VAT on Pan Masala Containing Tobacco under MVAT Act, 2002. Exemption Under Schedule Entry A-45 Upheld and Part Payment Orders Quashed as Explanation Inserted by Notification dated 21.01.2006 Held Ultra Vires.
4 Oct 2016The dispute arose under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 regarding the levy of VAT on pan masala containing tobacco (gutkha/mawa) for the fin...
- 14
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Quashes NCLT Order Directing State to Permit Windmill Operations in Insolvency Case. NCLT Exceeded Jurisdiction by Exercising Judicial Review Over Administrative Decision, Following Supreme Court Decision in Embassy Property Developments v. State of Karnataka.
13 Apr 2023The dispute arose out of insolvency proceedings against M/s Wind World (India) Limited, which held a lease over forest land for operating windmills. T...
- 32
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in MVAT Classification Dispute — Multi Function Printers Held Classifiable as Automatic Data Processing Machines Under Entry 84.71. The Court ruled that multi function printers with copying, printing, scanning, and faxing capabilities are classifiable as automatic data processing machines or units thereof under Entry 84.71 of the VAT Notification, not as laser jet printers or under residual entry.
20 Dec 2018The appellant, Ricoh India Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, filed an appeal under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 200...
- 105
High Court
Bombay High Court Disposes of Writ Petition on Octroi Duty Classification of Rubber Goods. Court Directs Development Commissioner's Opinion on Commercial Identity and Trade Usage of Imported Items Under Maharashtra Municipality Octroi Rules.
23 Mar 2005The writ petition was filed by Ceat Tyres of India Ltd., a tyre manufacturer, challenging octroi duty demand notices issued by the Nashik Municipal Co...
- 20
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition to Set Aside Arbitral Award in Construction Dispute — No Grounds for Interference Under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Court held that the arbitral tribunal's interpretation of contractual clauses was plausible and not patently illegal.
30 Nov -0001The petitioner, Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Ltd., entered into a contract with the respondent, Jai Laxmi Constructions Engineers An...
- 110
