Register free! 
Pharmaceuticals - Judgement
[ 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 ]  

 
First | 1 | 2 | Next | Last
Documents Found: 27   
Title Forum  Year
Max Overseas vs CC [LexDoc Id : 381444]
CESTAT (Mumbai) 2009
Ramprakash Gulati and Kewal K. Gulati vs State [LexDoc Id : 378326]
HC (Bombay) 2009
Mustaque vs State of Utter Pradesh [LexDoc Id : 375783]
HC (Allahabad) 2009
Schwan Stabilo Cosmetics GMBH and Co. KG vs CC [LexDoc Id : 379553]
CESTAT (Mumbai) 2009
Sunita Chander vs Govt of NCT of Delhi Drugs Control Department New Delhi [LexDoc Id : 375648]
HC (Delhi) 2009
Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals India Ltd. vs UOI and Ors. [LexDoc Id : 374742]
HC (Delhi) 2009
P. Sukumar vs State [LexDoc Id : 374378]
HC (Chennai) 2009
CCE vs Fourrts (I) Laboratories (P) Ltd. [LexDoc Id : 382991]
CESTAT (Chennai) 2009
Dalel Singh vs State of Haryana [LexDoc Id : 373743]
SC 2009
Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 385118]
CESTAT (Bangalore) 2009
Midas Care Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. vs CCE and C [LexDoc Id : 371770]
CESTAT (Mumbai) 2009
Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 372409]
CESTAT (Ahmedabad) 2009
Karnail Singh vs State of Haryana [LexDoc Id : 374056]
SC 2009
D. Ramakrishnan vs Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau [LexDoc Id : 368006]
SC 2009
United Chemicals vs APC Pharmaceuticals and Chemicals Ltd., Mitsui O.S.K. Lines (H.K.) Ltd. and National Insurance Co. Ltd. [LexDoc Id : 366912]
HC (Bombay) 2009
CIT vs Mcdowell and Co. Ltd. Deduction on actual payment-Tax, fee, cess or duty, Bottling fee-AY 1995-96. The assessee was manufacturing liquor. The bottling fee payable under excise was neither, tax nor fee nor duty nor cess. Therefore, the bo [LexDoc Id : 363256]
SC 2009
Rajesh Sharma and Nafe Singh vs UOI [LexDoc Id : 363943]
HC (Delhi) 2009
Ram Swaroop vs State of Delhi [LexDoc Id : 363004]
HC (Delhi) 2009
State of Punjab vs Leela [LexDoc Id : 374345]
SC 2009
CCE vs Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Ltd.

Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Ltd. vs CCE
Applicability of statute having different object to another-Non-applicability of certain maxims in taxation matters-The definition of one statute having different object, purpose and scheme could not be applied mechanically to another statute. The primary object of [LexDoc Id : 360791]
SC 2009
Bal Bahadur vs Customs [LexDoc Id : 361165]
HC (Delhi) 2009
State of NCT of Delhi vs Ashif Khan @ Kalu [LexDoc Id : 358215]
SC 2009
Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs CCE [LexDoc Id : 363700]
CESTAT (Ahmedabad) 2009
State of Punjab vs Hari Singh and Ors. [LexDoc Id : 363604]
SC 2009
Customs vs Ahmad Urukapa [LexDoc Id : 395323]
HC (Delhi) 2009
 
First | 1 | 2 | Next | Last