Search Results for "tobacco processing"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Upholds Refusal to Eschew Proof Affidavit in Probate Proceedings. ...
Supreme Court Allows Agriculturists' Appeal for Enhanced Compensation; Condones ...

Search Results for "tobacco processing"

34 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 34 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Set-off Claim in Sales Tax Reference, Holding Conversion of Raw Tobacco into Chewing Tobacco Constitutes Manufacture. The process of converting raw tobacco into Jarda results in a distinct product, qualifying as manufacture under Section 2(17) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, entitling the applicant to set-off on packing materials.

2 Jul 2010

The applicant, M/s R.K. Patel & Company, a partnership firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of chewing tobacco (Jarda) from raw tobacco, was asses...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Market Fee Levy on Tobacco Products Under APMC Act — Tobacco Products Held Not Exempt as 'Manufactured Product' Under Section 2(1)(a) of Bombay Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1939. Processing of tobacco into chewing tobacco or gutka does not transform it into a manufactured product; market fee is leviable.

24 Apr 2006

The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by companies and their shareholders challenging the levy of market fee on tobacco products under the Bo...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows State’s Appeal in Sales Tax Matter Concerning Deduction of Excise Duty. Raw Tobacco and Processed Chewing Tobacco Constitute Different Marketable Products, So Excise Duty Paid on Raw Tobacco Cannot Be Deducted from Turnover of Chewing Tobacco Under Rule 5(1)(i) of Madras General Sales Tax (Turnover and Assessment) Rules, 1939.

14 Dec 1965

The respondent, a tobacco factory in Vedaranyam, purchased raw tobacco and, after processing it, sold it as chewing tobacco. Excise duty under the Cen...

High Court

Bombay High Court Grants Interim Relief to Pan Masala Manufacturers in Challenge to Maharashtra Gutka Ban — Petitioners Allowed to Continue Manufacturing Outside State Pending Final Hearing. Court Found Prima Facie Case and Balance of Convenience in Favour of Petitioners Under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

15 Sep 2012

The petitioners, companies engaged in the manufacture, supply, and distribution of pan masala containing tobacco (gutka) and pan masala not containing...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Petitioners in Food Adulteration Case — No Offence Made Out Under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. Sale of 'Mint' and 'Saunf' Products Not Prohibited Under Section 26(2)(i) of FSS Act, 2006 as They Are Not 'Food' as Defined.

13 Sep 2019

The petitioners, Anand Ramdhani Chaurasia and Vijay Banarasi Chaurasia, were engaged in the business of selling 'Mint' and 'Saunf' products. On 12th J...

High Court

Bombay High Court Partially Allows Petition Against Ban on Transport of Banned Food Products Through Maharashtra. Inter-State Transport of Banned Products Not Prohibited Under Section 30(2)(a) of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

9 Jan 2021

The petitioners, including the driver, cleaner, owner of a truck, and a transporter, challenged an order dated 15/7/2020 issued by the Food Safety Com...

High Court

Bombay High Court Upholds Levy of Market Fees on Vanaspati as Edible Oil Under Maharashtra APMC Act. Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil Held to Fall Within 'Edible Oils' Entry Added by 1987 Notification; Levy of Fees and Supervision Charges Upheld.

16 Jun 2006

Two writ petitions were filed by companies manufacturing Vanaspati, challenging the levy of market fees and supervision charges by the Mumbai Agricult...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Challenging Market Fee on Copra as Not Notified Agricultural Produce Under APMC Act. Explanation to Rule 32(1) of Goa APMC Rules Held Ultra Vires as Copra Not in Schedule to Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963.

22 Jul 2016

The petitioners, Marico Industries Ltd. and Jude Linhares, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Goa challenging the demand for market...

High Court

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Hears Petitions Challenging Maharashtra Cotton Seed Price Control Legislation. The court examined the validity of the Maharashtra Cotton Seed Act, 2009 and notifications fixing maximum sale prices of BGI and BGII cotton seeds, in light of the Essential Commodities Act, Seeds Act, and Environment Protection Act.

13 Aug 2013

...

Supreme Court

"Supreme Court Clarifies Legislative Competence on Alcohol Regulation: Potable vs Industrial Alcohol" "A landmark judgment addressing the scope of State and Union powers on regulating alcohol under the Indian Constitution."

23 Oct 2024

The Supreme Court of India revisited the legislative competence concerning the regulation of alcohol under the Constitution. The court examined whethe...

1 2 3

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