Search Results for "Bharat Aluminium"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit — Concurrent Findi...
High Court of Bombay at Bombay Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Acc...
Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice Under Section 148 of Income Tax Ac...
High Court of Karnataka Allows EPF Organisation's Writ Petition for Priority Pay...

Search Results for "Bharat Aluminium"

55 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 55 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Central Excise Case: Cutting and Grooving of Aluminum Composite Panels Does Not Amount to Manufacture. Process of cutting, grooving, and routing ACPs for facade cladding does not bring into existence a new product with distinct name, character, or use under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

27 May 2026

The appellant, M/s Alupuro Building Systems Pvt. Ltd., is a construction contractor that imports pre-coated Aluminum Composite Panels (ACPs) and under...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Central Excise Case — Cutting and Grooving of Aluminum Composite Panels Does Not Amount to Manufacture. Process of cutting, grooving, and routing ACPs for façade cladding does not bring into existence a new product with distinct name, character, and use under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

27 May 2026

The appellant, is a construction contractor that imports Aluminum Composite Panels (ACPs) and undertakes cutting, grooving, and routing of these panel...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Section 9 Petition for Lack of Territorial Jurisdiction in International Commercial Arbitration. Parties Impliedly Excluded Part I of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by Agreeing to ICC Rules and Zambian Law.

19 Mar 2013

The petitioner, Konkola Copper Mines (PLC), a company registered in Zambia, filed a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Chamber Summons Seeking to Set Aside Consent Terms in Arbitration Petition — Consent Terms Recorded by Court Cannot Be Challenged Under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

22 Dec 2015

The applicants, original respondent nos.1 to 5, filed Chamber Summons No.905 of 2013 in Letters Patent Petition No.226 of 2013 and Arbitration Petitio...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Section 9 Petition for Lack of Territorial Jurisdiction in Foreign Award Enforcement. Court holds that under the amended Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, only the High Court having jurisdiction over the subject matter of the award can entertain interim measures, not any court where assets are located.

9 Oct 2017

The petitioner, Trammo DMCC, a company incorporated in the UAE, obtained a foreign arbitral award against the respondent, Nagarjuna Fertilizers and Ch...

High Court

Madras High Court Sets Aside MSME Facilitation Council Award for Lack of Jurisdiction — BSNL Not Liable for Interest Under MSMED Act as Council Had No Territorial Authority Over Dispute Arising from Contract with Chennai Seat of Arbitration.

6 Feb 2026

The petitioner, M/s. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Foreign Company in Arbitration Dispute — Holds That Foreign Award Cannot Be Challenged Under Section 34 of Arbitration Act. Challenge to Foreign Award Lies Only Under Sections 47-48 for Enforcement, Overruling Bombay High Court's Reliance on Bhatia International.

26 Nov 2020

The appellant, Noy Vallesina Engineering SpA (now Noy Ambiente S.p.a), an Italian company, challenged a judgment of the Bombay High Court which held t...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Arbitration Petition for Lack of Territorial Jurisdiction — Parties Exclusively Agreed to Pune Courts Under Selling Agency Agreement Clause 8. Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause in Contract Prevents Bombay High Court from Entertaining Section 34 Petition Despite Respondent's Registered Office in Mumbai.

7 Apr 2016

The petitioner, Unitech Texmech Private Limited, filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging an arbit...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Arbitration Petition Challenging Arbitral Award on Grounds of Patent Illegality and Public Policy. Court sets aside award for ignoring contractual terms and failing to consider counterclaims.

29 Oct 2015

The judgment concerns two arbitration petitions arising out of the same arbitral award. The petitioners (original respondents) challenged the award un...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Section 43B(f) of Income Tax Act — Leave Encashment Deduction Allowed Only on Actual Payment. Clause (f) is not arbitrary or violative of Article 14 as it serves a legitimate purpose of preventing abuse and ensuring employee welfare.

24 Apr 2020

The Supreme Court in this appeal considered the constitutional validity of clause (f) of Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was inserted b...

1 2 3

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