Central Excise Act, 1944 – Section 11B – Central Excise Rules, 2002 – Rule 18 – Rebate of duty – While making claim for rebate of duty under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, the period of limitation prescribed under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 shall have to be applied and applicable
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANSERA ENGINEERING LIMITED — Appellant Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT, BENGALURU — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh, JJ.…
Pharmacy – Fake Pharmacist – Under the provisions of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 as well as the Pharmacy Practice Regulations, 2015, it is the duty cast upon the Pharmacy Council and the State Government to see that the hospitals/medical stores, etc., are not run by the fake pharmacist and are run by the registered pharmacist only – Remanded
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MUKESH KUMAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M. R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. )…
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 482 – Quashing of Complaint/FIR – Complaint on the basis of which FIR came to be registered at the instance of the de-facto complainant does not disclose any act of the accused or their participation in the commission of crime – FIR quashed
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAMESH CHANDRA GUPTA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. ) Criminal…
Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 – Section 94(1)(nn) and 95(1)(f) – Pension Scheme – State Government can always exercise the powers under clause (nn) of subsection (1) Section 94 of the 1965 Act for determining the conditions of service of the officers (other than the Housing Commissioner) and employees of the Board
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. VIRENDRA KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka and…
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – The landowners who had refused to accept compensation or who sought reference for higher compensation, cannot claim that the acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SHIV DUTT SHARMA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M.…
Lapse of land acquisition proceedings – – if the compensation has not been paid due to inter se dispute between the co-owners, thereafter, it will not be open for the landowners to make a grievance that once the compensation was not paid, the acquisition is deemed to have lapsed
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE SECRETARY, THE DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND BUILDING AND ORS. — Appellant Vs. ANJEET SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before…
Service Law – Regularization – Merely because employee continued in service for longer period on contractual basis the High Court ought not to have passed the order of regularization
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILA PARISHAD, THANE AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SANTOSH TUKARAM TIWARE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and…
Maharashtra Land Revenue (Extraction and Removal of Minor Minerals) Rules, 1968 – Rule 4A – – The object and purpose of Rule 4A would be permitting the family of Vadar community to continue their traditional profession of stone crushing by hand by extracting the stone up to 200 brass annually without payment of any fee or royalty – Rule 4A is not meant for the lease for commercial use.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHARASHTRA RAJYA VADAR SAMAJ SANGH — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh, JJ.…
Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 45(4) – Capital gains – Assets revalued and the credit into the capital accounts of the respective partners can be said to be “transfer” and which fall in the category of “OTHERWISE” and therefore, the provision of Section 45(4) inserted by Finance Act, 1987 w.e.f. 01.04.1988 shall be applicable.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – 23 — Appellant Vs. M/S. MANSUKH DYEING AND PRINTING MILLS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and…
Acquisition of land – If there is a large tract of land under acquisition but is capable of being used for the purpose for which smaller plots are used and is situate in a fully developed area with little or no requirement of any further development to be made, there would be no need for deduction of the value.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. RADHESHYAM AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, JJ.…