Search Results for "Section 28(1)"

587 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 587 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Company's Challenge to SAFEMA Forfeiture Order for Property Linked to Narcotics Trafficking. Burden of Proof Under Section 7 SAFEMA Not Discharged by Claimant.

The petitioner, Imperial Exim (India) Pvt. Ltd., challenged an order dated 31 March 2011 passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property, New ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Acquits Revision Petitioner in Food Adulteration Case Due to Non-Compliance with Mandatory Sampling Procedure. Failure to Follow Rule 14 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 Renders Conviction Unsustainable.

The case pertains to a criminal revision petition filed by M. Ajithkumar, the proprietor of Swasthik Trading Company, challenging his conviction under...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Assessee in Income Tax Case, Holding Voluntary Return Below Taxable Limit is a Valid Return. Assessment Completed Beyond Four Years of Assessment Year Under Section 34(1) Notice Was Invalid as No Income Had Escaped Assessment.

The case involved an assessee, Ranchhoddas Karsondas, who submitted a voluntary return of income for the assessment year 1945-46 on January 5, 1950, d...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Examines Maintainability of Individual Workmen's Complaints for Permanency Under MRTU & PULP Act, 1971. Industrial Court Dismissed Complaints Holding Recognised Union Had Exclusive Right to File Such Complaints, and High Court Finds Need for Factual Adjudication on Merits.

The writ petitions arose from a common judgment of the Industrial Court, Pune, dated 13-3-1996, which dismissed 63 workmen's complaints seeking perman...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Admission of Winding-Up Petition Against Telecom Company Due to Substratum Erosion and Deadlock. Cancellation of 2G Licences and Irreconcilable Differences Between Equal Shareholders Justify Winding-Up Under Section 433(f) of the Companies Act, 1956.

The appeal arose from an order of the company judge admitting a petition for winding up of Etisalat D.B. Telecom Limited (the company) under Section 4...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision Against Rejection of Plaint in Property Suit — Limitation and Cause of Action Are Triable Issues. Court holds that Order VII Rule 11 CPC application cannot be decided on disputed facts regarding knowledge of sale deeds and limitation.

The Bombay High Court dismissed a Civil Revision Application filed by Defendant No.15 (M/s. Mahabharat Builders) challenging the trial court's order d...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 661 OF 2005

The case arose from Special Case No. 10 of 2001 before the III Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad, where eight accused faced trial on charges of kidnap...