Search Results for "Air India Limited"

6999 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 6999 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Considers Whether Dearness Allowance is a Fundamental Right, Hears Appeals Against High Court Mandate to Pay Central Rates. High Court's declaration of Dearness Allowance under Article 21 and direction for parity with Central Government employees challenged by State.

The State of West Bengal filed appeals by special leave challenging the orders of the High Court at Calcutta dated 20th May 2022 and 22nd September 20...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION(L) NO. 6451 OF 2020

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Commercial Division, pronounced judgment on 16 March 2022 in a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitrat...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench Hears Miscellaneous First Appeals Filed by Acquiring Authority Against Enhanced Compensation Awarded by Reference Court in Land Acquisition Cases — Appeals Filed Under Section 54(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894

These miscellaneous first appeals were filed by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition A...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

SALES TAX REFERENCE NO. 52 OF 2009

The matter came before the Bombay High Court as two sales tax references arising from the assessment of M/s. Radhasons International, a partnership fi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION PETITION (L) NO.238 OF 2019

The present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed by Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Li...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

WRIT PETITION NO. 1562 2004 AND CONTEMPT PETITION NO.

...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Time Limit for Availing Input Tax Credit Under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. The court held that the time limit is mandatory and not directory, and retrospective amendments are valid.

The Bombay High Court, in a batch of writ petitions, addressed the constitutional validity and interpretation of Section 16(4) of the Central Goods an...