Search Results for "limitation period"

Trending :

Supreme Court Allows Indian Railways' Appeals, Upholds Its Status as Deemed Dist...
Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Specific Performance Case — Delay in Deposit of...
Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable for Dual Appointment and Forgery in...
Supreme Court Alters Conviction from Murder to Attempt to Murder in Absence of C...
Supreme Court Sets Aside Appointment Orders in Steel Plant Recruitment Case Due ...

Search Results for "limitation period"

243 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 243 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeals in VAT/GST Pre-deposit Dispute — Holds That Proof of Payment Can Be Produced Before First Hearing. The Court ruled that the requirement to deposit 12.5% of the disputed tax under the second proviso of Section 19 of the APGST Act, 1957 does not mandate payment within the limitation period for filing the appeal, but only before the appeal is first taken up for consideration.

10 Jul 2019

The Supreme Court considered a batch of civil appeals arising from orders of the Appellate Authority under the APGST Act, 1957, AP VAT Act, 2005, and ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order Passed Without Hearing Second Wife in Matrimonial Dispute. The Court Remands Case for Fresh Adjudication After Impleading Necessary Party, Emphasizing Natural Justice.

9 May 2019

The dispute arose from a matrimonial suit between respondent No.1 (husband) and respondent No.2 (first wife). The Family Court passed an ex parte decr...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal as Abated Due to Non-Substitution of Legal Heirs of Deceased Appellant in Property Title Suit. Appeal Abates Entirely When Deceased Appellant's Interest is Inseparable from Co-Appellants, Rendering Inconsistent Decrees Impossible.

26 Apr 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeals filed by the defendants/appellants against the judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh which had co...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Cantonment Board Appeals Against High Court Order Quashing Demolition Notices for Lack of Proper Hearing. Notices Issued Under Section 185 of Cantonments Act, 1924 Set Aside for Mechanical Issuance and Non-Consideration of Objections.

23 Apr 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed a batch of appeals filed by the Cantonment Board, Meerut and others against a common order of the Allahabad High Court dat...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Holds Section 15J Factors Illustrative in SEBI Penalty Adjudication. Adjudicating Officer Retains Discretion to Consider Mitigating Circumstances Beyond Stipulated Factors Under SEBI Act.

28 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court of India adjudicated a reference arising from multiple civil appeals concerning the interpretation of Section 15J of the Securities ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Specific Performance Suit — Time Was Essence of Contract and Plaintiffs Failed to Prove Readiness and Willingness. Limitation Period Under Article 54 of Limitation Act, 1963 Starts from Date Fixed for Performance; Extension Not Proven.

26 Feb 2019

The appeal arose from a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell property at 82, Jor Bagh, New Delhi, dated 05.10.1974, between the plain...

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 ...

22 23 24 25

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