Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.20 seconds)M/S Nestle India Limited vs The State Of Haryana And Others on 28 May, 2010
In response thereto, counsel for the petitioner has made a
frantic effort to impress upon us that the issues raised in the present
writ petition have not been referred to in detail by the Division Bench
in the case of M/s Nestle India Limited (supra).
Krishan Kanhaiya Milk Foods Limited And ... vs Haryana State Industrial Development ... on 6 August, 1998
However, to avoid further addition to the pendency to the
cases in the Hon'ble Supreme Court and in the light of the admission
on the part of the counsel for the parties that ultimately this dispute
will be dependent on the decision of the Apex Court to be taken in
the judgement in M/s Nestle India Limited's case (supra), which is
pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of M/s Karnal Milk Foods (supra), wherein a conditional order of
stay has been passed i.e. deposit of 50% cess levied and demanded
by the State, we are of the considered view that this interim
arrangement, as ordered, would also apply qua the petitioner from
today and the parties would be governed by the final order, which
may be passed by the Supreme Court.
Article 202 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 203 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 204 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 246 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 248 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 265 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Punjab Dairy Development Board & Anr., ... vs Cepham Milk Specialities Ltd. & Ors., ... on 20 August, 2004
He states that the judgement of the Supreme Court in the
case of Punjab Dairy Development Board's case (supra) has also
been referred and on consideration has been distinguished and while
doing so, it has been held that imposition of cess under the 2001 Act
is in accordance with law and the case of the petitioner is not
covered by the said judgement of the Supreme Court.