Search Results for "notification"

Trending :

Supreme Court Allows Indian Railways' Appeals, Upholds Its Status as Deemed Dist...
Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Specific Performance Case — Delay in Deposit of...
Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable for Dual Appointment and Forgery in...
Supreme Court Alters Conviction from Murder to Attempt to Murder in Absence of C...
Supreme Court Sets Aside Appointment Orders in Steel Plant Recruitment Case Due ...

Search Results for "notification"

1186 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1186 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal by U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad in Land Acquisition Compensation Case. Market Value Fixed at Rs.99 per sq. yard Upheld as Just and Reasonable Based on Comparable Sale Deeds and Location of Land.

26 Feb 2019

The case pertains to the acquisition of land by U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (the appellant) under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a housing schem...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeals in Urban Land Ceiling Case — Upholds Vesting of Land in State and Rejects Ownership Claim. The Court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove their title and that the suit was barred by res judicata and limitation.

26 Feb 2019

The case involves a dispute over land bearing No.73, Canal Circular Road, Calcutta, which was part of a larger parcel of land. The plaintiffs, claimin...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Regularization of Junior Linemen Appointments in A.P. Power Utilities — Preference to Contract Labourers Based on Length of Service Upheld. The court held that appointments beyond the advertised 7114 posts were illegal and could not be regularized, directing fresh selections for the 7319 posts.

25 Feb 2019

The case pertains to the validity of appointments to the posts of Junior Linemen in the Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation (A.P. TRANSCO) and fou...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Carrying Cost in Change in Law Claims Under PPA — Restitutionary Principle Upheld. Article 13.2 of Power Purchase Agreement Entitles Generating Company to Carrying Cost from Date of Change in Law Till Approval.

25 Feb 2019

The case involves appeals by Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (Haryana Discoms) and Gujarat Urja Vika...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Adoption Referral for NRI Couple Who Acquired US Citizenship During Process — Seniority Based on First Application as Indian Prospective Adoptive Parents Not Lost. The Court held that the change in citizenship status did not automatically extinguish the seniority of the respondents, and the referral of the child made before the change was valid under the Adoption Regulations, 2017.

25 Feb 2019

The case involves an appeal by the Union of India and the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) against a Division Bench judgment of the High Cou...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B(1) Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) is distinct from the manufacturer's right, and the benefit of the second proviso (waiver of limitation for duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The Supreme Court dismissed a batch of appeals filed by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central exci...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim in Central Excise Duty Case — Limitation Period Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the period of limitation of six months under Section 11B(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 applies to a buyer's refund claim even if the manufacturer paid duty under protest, as the rights of manufacturer and buyer are distinct.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the appellant/buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise dut...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The Court held that the buyer's refund claim is time-barred as it was filed beyond six months from the date of purchase, and the manufacturer's protest does not extend the limitation for the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Buyer's Refund Claim for Central Excise Duty Paid Under Protest by Manufacturer — Limitation Period Under Section 11B Applies Separately to Buyer. The right of the buyer to claim refund under Section 11B(2)(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is distinct from that of the manufacturer, and the benefit of the second proviso (duty paid under protest) does not extend to the buyer.

20 Feb 2019

The case involves a batch of appeals by Western Coalfields Ltd. (the buyer) against the rejection of its refund claim for central excise duty paid by ...

111 112 113 114 115

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