Search Results for "Companies Amendment Act 2000"

808 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 808 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Electricity Duty Case Due to Statutory Interpretation. Levy Under Bihar Electricity Duty Act 1948 Not Applicable as Supply Was to Licensee, Not Consumer as Defined Under Sections 2(b) and 2(ee).

The appeal arose from a judgment of the Patna High Court dated 18 September 2017, which declined to entertain a writ petition filed by the appellant, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeal Challenging Withdrawal of Labour Welfare Cess Exemption for SEZ Developers. The court held that the exemption was a concession and could be withdrawn by the government, and the appellant had no vested right to its continuation.

The appellant, M/s. Primal Projects Limited, a company engaged in constructing and developing IT parks in Special Economic Zones (SEZ), challenged the...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Local Body Tax Classification. Classification of dealers based on turnover for LBT exemption is valid under Article 14 as it has a rational nexus with the object of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949.

The petitioners, M/s. Nagpur Distillers Private Limited and M/s. Vidarbha Distillers, are dealers within the meaning of Section 2(16A) of the Maharash...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Appeal in Land Revenue Dispute — Upholds Deputy Commissioner's Order for Possession. Challenge to Revenue Entries and Possessory Rights Negatived as Appellants Failed to Establish Title or Valid Lease.

The case involves an intra-court appeal filed by M/S Neria Estates Rural Industries Association Pvt. Ltd. and its Managing Director against the State ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Upholds EPF Demand Against Regional Rural Bank for Uncovered Employees. Exclusion Under Section 16(1)(c) of EPF Act Not Applicable as Bank's Pension Scheme Did Not Cover All Workers, Following Pawan Hans Precedent.

The dispute arose from a demand by the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation for provident fund contributions amounting to Rs. 10,29,26,330/- against...