| First | Prev | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | Next | Last |
| Documents Found: 358 |
| Title |
Forum |
Year |
Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs CC
[LexDoc Id : 446790]
|
CESTAT (Mumbai) |
2013 |
Prathista Industries Ltd. vs CTO and Anr.
Initiation and completion of assessment under CST Act 1956: Pendency of application for advance ruling-Provisions of s.67 of AP VAT Act 2005 not applicable to assessments made under CST Act 1956-The first respondent was held entitled to initiate and complete the assessment under the Central Sales Tax Act 1956 in respect of the petitioner when [LexDoc Id : 445353]
|
HC (Andhra Pradesh) |
2013 |
State of Haryana and Anr. vs Polar Industries Ltd.
[LexDoc Id : 444880]
|
SC |
2013 |
State of Haryana and Anr. vs Rubber Reclaim Co. of India
Appeal against direction to refund amount availed of by way of tax exemption: Dispatch of goods on consignment basis during relevant assessment periods in breach of rule 28A-Appeal against direction to refund amount availed of by way of tax exemption: Dispatch of goods on consignment basis during relevant assessment periods in breach of rule 28A-The high court had set aside the assessment order passed by the assessing authority, wherein the assessee was directed to refund the amount, which was [LexDoc Id : 444879]
|
SC |
2013 |
Indo Alusys Industries Ltd., In re
[LexDoc Id : 452729]
|
GOI |
2013 |
Bharat Constructions Co. vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 451223]
|
HC (Madhya Pradesh) |
2013 |
UOI vs Vinod Kumar Samson Michael and Anr.
[LexDoc Id : 437441]
|
HC (Bombay) |
2013 |
Allentis Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. vs State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr.
[LexDoc Id : 442822]
|
HC (Madhya Pradesh) |
2013 |
TVL Supreme Industries Ltd. vs Authority for Clarification and Advance Ruling and Anr.
Rejection of application seeking clarification of product: Procedure laid down in proviso to s.48-A and rule 12-A not followed-Impugned order set aside, Matter remitted for fresh consideration-In a petition praying to issue a writ calling for the records of first respondent, the high court held that proviso to Rule 12-A of the Tamil Nadu Val [LexDoc Id : 441420]
|
HC (Madras) |
2013 |
Southern Refineries Ltd. vs State of Kerala and Ors.
Doctrine of promissory estoppel-Doctrine to evolve and expand itself to do justice between parties and ensure equity between them-The doctrine of promissory estoppel was an equitable remedy and had to be moulded depending on the facts of each case and not straight jacketed into p [LexDoc Id : 450836]
|
HC (Kerala) |
2013 |
State of Haryana vs Glaxo India Ltd. and Anr.
[LexDoc Id : 449465]
|
HC (Punjab and Haryana) |
2013 |
Commissioner of Value Added Tax Delhi vs Carzonrent India (P) Ltd.
Proportionate input tax credit: Allusion to proportion not referring to nature or type of sale-Impermissible for court to read into statute another proportional rule without statutory sanction once assessee made entitled to certain benefit of input credit by statute-The assessee contended that the impugned orders of tribunal, to the extent they held that input credit could be availed only in proportion to the tax [LexDoc Id : 441421]
|
HC (Delhi) |
2013 |
Apar Industries Ltd. vs Joint Director General of Foreign Trade and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 436893]
|
HC (Bombay) |
2013 |
Assistant CTO vs Asian Paints India Ltd. and Anr.
[LexDoc Id : 444889]
|
HC (Rajasthan) |
2013 |
Rama Phosphates Ltd. vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.
Denial of benefit of Incentive Scheme: Benefit availed during operative period of eligibility certificate-Total misinterpretation and wrong application of clause 4(e)(ii) to initiate recovery proceedings, No breach of condition of Scheme by petitioner found, Assessment orders and demands raised for relevant period quashed-The petitioner had challenged the impugned assessment order, inter alia, denying the benefit of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Incentive Scheme 1987. The hig [LexDoc Id : 440943]
|
HC (Rajasthan) |
2013 |
Nutan Kumar and Anr. vs Rajesh Arora and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 467277]
|
HC (Delhi) |
2013 |
Sohan Lal vs U.P. Co-op. Federation Ltd. and Anr.
[LexDoc Id : 446616]
|
HC (Allahabad) |
2013 |
Mohammed Sultan Ahmed and Ors. vs Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce Co-op. Federation Ltd. and Anr.
Applicability of exemption notifications: Rate of tax renumbered by Amendment Act-No change in rate of tax, Exemption applicable to all forest produce exigible to tax, Petitions involving mixed question of facts and law, Liberty reserved to petitioners to prefer application before VAT Commissioner for exemption-The petitioners had challenged the notifications granting exemption partly so as to reduce the rate of tax on minor forest produce to four percent and [LexDoc Id : 447353]
|
HC (Chhattisgarh) |
2013 |
Nakshatra Service Apartments vs Assistant Commissioner
Order demanding tax and penalty passed without giving opportunity of hearing-Requirement of hearing becoming necessary as specific request made for cross examination, Matters remitted for fresh consideration-The petitioner was held to be liable for tax as well as penalty under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Tax on Luxuries in Hotels and Lodging Houses Act 19 [LexDoc Id : 443053]
|
HC (Madras) |
2013 |
Shri Sharda Domestic Fuels (P) Ltd. vs State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 441305]
|
HC (Madhya Pradesh) |
2013 |
Bishal Trading vs State of Assam and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 453442]
|
HC (Gauhati) |
2013 |
Sunrise Food Products (P) Ltd. vs Commissioner Commercial Tax and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 454492]
|
HC (Calcutta) |
2013 |
Sterling and Wilson Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 451023]
|
HC (Andhra Pradesh) |
2013 |
Nashik Merchant's Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs Dhananjay Shriram Daga, Rajashri Dhananjay Daga and Laxmichand M. Lilame
[LexDoc Id : 446212]
|
HC (Bombay) |
2013 |
P. Premkumar; Sai Trading Co. vs STO and Anr.
Cancellation of registration on failure to furnish additional security: Statutory provisions not taken into account when additional security was demanded and registration was cancelled-Impugned notice directing furnishing of additional security and order cancelling registration set aside, Direction to initiate fresh proceedings if so advised-The petitioner was a dealer registered under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act 2003. He was issued a notice stating that, having regard to the volume of [LexDoc Id : 443564]
|
HC (Kerala) |
2013 |
| |
| First | Prev | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | Next | Last |
| |
