Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.36 seconds)

Tisco Mazdoor Union vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors. on 16 April, 2004

[See CTT v. DSM Group of Industries[(2005) 1 SCC 657] (SCC para 26); Tisco Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand [(2005) 4 SCC 272] (SCC paras 42-45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. [(1996) 1 SCC 108] ; Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE & Customs [1994 Supp (3) SCC 606) ; A.P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. v. State of Kerala[(2007) 2 SCC 725] and Reiz Electrocontrols (P) Ltd. v. CCE. [(2006) 6 SCC 213]"
Jharkhand High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 11 - R K Merathia - Full Document

State Level Committee & Anr vs M/S Morgardshammar India Ltd on 10 November, 1995

[See CTT v. DSM Group of Industries[(2005) 1 SCC 657] (SCC para 26); Tisco Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand [(2005) 4 SCC 272] (SCC paras 42-45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. [(1996) 1 SCC 108] ; Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE & Customs [1994 Supp (3) SCC 606) ; A.P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. v. State of Kerala[(2007) 2 SCC 725] and Reiz Electrocontrols (P) Ltd. v. CCE. [(2006) 6 SCC 213]"
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 61 - B P Reddy - Full Document

Novopan India Ltd., Hyderabad vs Collector Of Central Excise And ... on 14 September, 1994

[See CTT v. DSM Group of Industries[(2005) 1 SCC 657] (SCC para 26); Tisco Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand [(2005) 4 SCC 272] (SCC paras 42-45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. [(1996) 1 SCC 108] ; Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE & Customs [1994 Supp (3) SCC 606) ; A.P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. v. State of Kerala[(2007) 2 SCC 725] and Reiz Electrocontrols (P) Ltd. v. CCE. [(2006) 6 SCC 213]"
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 289 - Full Document

Commnr. Of Central Excise, Surat-I vs M/S. Favourite Industries on 29 February, 2012

14. Section 54F is a beneficial provision and is applicable to an assessee when the old capital asset is replaced by a new capital asset inform of a residential house. Once an assessee falls within the ambit of a beneficial provision, then the said provision should be liberally interpreted. The Supreme Court in CCE versus Favourite Industries, (2012) 7 SCC 153 has succinctly observed:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 38 - Cited by 30 - Full Document

M/S Reiz Electrocontrols Pvt. Ltd vs Commr. Of Central Excise, Delhi-I on 31 July, 2006

[See CTT v. DSM Group of Industries[(2005) 1 SCC 657] (SCC para 26); Tisco Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand [(2005) 4 SCC 272] (SCC paras 42-45); State Level Committee v. Morgardshammar India Ltd. [(1996) 1 SCC 108] ; Novopan India Ltd. v. CCE & Customs [1994 Supp (3) SCC 606) ; A.P. Steel Re-Rolling Mill Ltd. v. State of Kerala[(2007) 2 SCC 725] and Reiz Electrocontrols (P) Ltd. v. CCE. [(2006) 6 SCC 213]"
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 8 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next