WRIT PETITION NO. 73 OF 2015
3 May 2019...
Search Results for "Central Government Authority"
7172 result(s) found
Found 7172 result(s)
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Petitions Against Stop Work Notice and Demolition Order in Cantonment Area — Holds That Repair of Old Grant Bungalow Does Not Require Prior Permission Under Revised Land Policy of 1995.
16 Oct 2020The petitioners, legal heirs of late Smt. Homai Nussarwanji Pudumjee, were occupancy holders of bungalow No.6, Maneckji Mehta Road, Pune, an old grant...
- 33
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Allows Revenue Appeal in Central Excise Valuation Case — Related Party Transactions Must Be Valued Under Rule 11 CEVR Read with Section 4(1)(b) of Central Excise Act, 1944. Circular dated 01.07.2002 Clarifying Valuation Method for Mixed Sales to Related and Unrelated Parties Is Binding and Correctly Applied by Revenue.
5 Dec 2022The present Civil Appeal arises from an order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chandigarh, ...
- 231
Supreme Court
Supreme Court of India Decides Revenue Appeal Against Tribunal's Order on Excise Valuation of Fiat Cars. Assessee's Price Below Cost Held as Normal Price Under Section 4(1)(a) by Tribunal, Revenue Challenges on Ground That Price Did Not Reflect Manufacturing Cost and Profit.
1 Aug 2026The dispute concerned the valuation of Fiat Uno model cars for central excise duty under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The assessee, M/s ...
- 63
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Upholds NEET for AYUSH Courses: Minimum Qualifying Marks Valid Under Section 22 of Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970. All-India Entrance Examination for BAMS, BUMS, BSMS, BHMS and MD-Ayurveda Held Within Regulatory Powers.
20 Feb 2020The Supreme Court considered appeals and writ petitions challenging the validity of notifications issued by the Central Council of Indian Medicine and...
- 207
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals in MSMED Act Arbitration Cases on Limitation and Counterclaim Issues. The Court held that the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to arbitration proceedings under Section 18(3) of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, and counterclaims are maintainable under Section 23(2A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, affirming the High Court's remand and arbitrator appointment orders.
29 Jun 2021The Supreme Court of India addressed two consolidated civil appeals involving arbitration proceedings under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises De...
- 246
High Court
Bombay High Court Hears Writ Petition Challenging Catering Policy 2005 for Railway Minor Units. Petitioners Seek to Quash Policy and Extend Existing Licences Under Catering Policy 2000.
12 Apr 2006The petitions involved a challenge to the Catering Policy 2005 introduced by the Indian Railways for minor catering units at railway stations across v...
- 28
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Holds Unilateral Appointment of Arbitrators Violates Equality Principle Under Section 18 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Party Autonomy Cannot Override Mandatory Requirement of Independence and Impartiality, and Unilateral Appointment Clauses in Public-Private Contracts Are Unconscionable and Void.
13 Nov 2024The Supreme Court of India, in a Constitution Bench judgment, addressed the validity of unilateral appointment of arbitrators under the Arbitration an...
- 919
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Upholds Trader's Liability for Excise Duty on Job Work Fabrics Under Rule 12B of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The Court Held That the Trader Who Gets Fabrics Manufactured Through Job Workers Is Deemed Manufacturer and Liable for Duty, Not the Job Worker.
28 Feb 2019The case involves appeals by Dinesh Textiles, a trader who got cotton fabrics and made-ups manufactured through job workers, against the order of the ...
- 191
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal by Qatar Airways Against Maintainability of Summary Suit for Recovery of Rs. 59.22 Lakhs. Foreign Company Not Entitled to Sovereign Immunity Under Section 86 CPC as It Is a Commercial Entity, Not a Foreign State.
8 Jan 2013The respondent, Shapoorji Pallonji & Co., filed a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the appellant, Qatar Ai...
- 150
