| First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | Next | Last |
| Documents Found: 220 |
| Title |
Forum |
Year |
CTO vs Jalani Enterprises
Sales tax: Jaljira-Jaljira a mixture of different spices after grinding and mixing, Entry No. 184 of Notification dated 29 March 2001 applicable to Jaljira, Respondent liable to pay tax at 16 percent-The respondent was a manufacturer and seller of Jaljira. It deposited sales tax at the rate of 10 percent assuming that Jaljira was not a masala and, [LexDoc Id : 405577]
|
SC |
2011 |
Hotel Utsav (P) Ltd. vs District Collector and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 413453]
|
HC (Gujarat) |
2011 |
Hiren Mahendrabhai Vaya vs State of Gujarat and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 413290]
|
HC (Gujarat) |
2011 |
K. Ummer vs State of Kerala
Kerala Government Sales Tax Act: Demand, penalty and interest-Suppression in purchase and sales proved with evidence, Interest on penalty not demandable from the date of original demand but for default in payment of penalty-The petitioner was found to be involved in suppression in purchase and sales. The assessment was made on estimation basis by adding three times of the [LexDoc Id : 412655]
|
HC (Kerala) |
2011 |
K.V. Chinnaiah vs Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Ors.
Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules 2005: Challenge to rule 135(2) and rule 144(1)-Rule 135(2) and rule 144(1) providing for an alternative scheme to be opted by the dealer, No scope for reading down rule 135(2) and rule 144(1)-The first respondent had cancelled the composition assessment and passed the reassessment order as per s.39(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act 20 [LexDoc Id : 411297]
|
HC (Karnataka) |
2011 |
Jyothy Laboratories Ltd. vs State of Assam, Commissioner of Taxes and Superintendent of Taxes
[LexDoc Id : 410966]
|
HC (Gauhati) |
2011 |
State of Punjab and Anr. vs Federal Gogul Goetze India Ltd.
Classification of goods: Common parlance test to be applied for classifying a fiscal entry-Residue entry not invocable if entry covered by specified entry-The normal test to be applied for classifying a fiscal entry was a common parlance test and if the entry was covered by specified entry, the residue e [LexDoc Id : 406109]
|
HC (Punjab and Haryana) |
2011 |
State of Punjab and Anr. vs Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd.
[LexDoc Id : 405314]
|
HC (Punjab and Haryana) |
2011 |
K.V. Paul vs State of Kerala
[LexDoc Id : 422743]
|
HC (Kerala) |
2011 |
S. Subrahmanyan and Co. vs CCE
[LexDoc Id : 413851]
|
CESTAT (Ahmedabad) |
2011 |
Instrumenatation Ltd. vs CCE
[LexDoc Id : 409771]
|
CESTAT (Delhi) |
2011 |
State of West Bengal and Ors. vs Indian Jute Mills Association and Ors.
Input tax credit: Stores and spare parts for plant and machinery used for manufacturing taxable goods-Benefit of rebate only to consumable stores, Decayed or used up spare parts within the purview of consumable stores-The high court, considering whether stores and spare parts for plant and machinery used for manufacturing taxable goods would fall within the meaning [LexDoc Id : 407958]
|
HC (Calcutta) |
2011 |
Mohan Bakers (P) Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 438562]
|
WBTT |
2011 |
Ashok Kumar Ghosh vs STO and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 413454]
|
WBTT |
2011 |
Epitome Petrochemical (P) Ltd. and Anr. vs CST and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 413444]
|
WBTT |
2011 |
Sakthi Enterprises vs Deputy Commissioner and Anr.
[LexDoc Id : 419632]
|
HC (Chennai) |
2011 |
Rajpoot Supply Syndicate vs Joint CST and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 437945]
|
WBTT |
2011 |
Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. vs Joint Commissioner and Anr.
[LexDoc Id : 413485]
|
HC (Chennai) |
2011 |
Madhu Machine Tools, A. Sathya Narayana vs State of Karnataka and Ors.
Kara Samadana Scheme: Modification of government order-Order providing for sanction of relief and concessions for rehabilitation of sick industries, Fourth respondent directed to reconsider petitioner’s case based on government order-The petitioner was a proprietorship concern involved in manufacture of precision tools, room components and automobile products. Its unit was declared [LexDoc Id : 409955]
|
HC (Karnataka) |
2011 |
Sasikumar vs State of Kerala
[LexDoc Id : 425435]
|
HC (Kerala) |
2011 |
Starline Agency vs Nabajit Das and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 413667]
|
HC (Gauhati) |
2011 |
Bharti Airtel Ltd. vs State of Karnataka, UOI and Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Tata Teleservices Ltd. vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Local Vat Officer and Commissioner of Service Tax
Artificially created light energy: Contract between subscriber and service provider in transmission of data or messages an indivisible contract and contract of service simplicitor-ACLE one form of electromagnetic waves, ACLE not goods, No power to assessing authority to levy tax since no sale of goods-The light energy, which was used as a carrier in telecommunication service for rendering service, was covered by the Finance Act 1994 read with s.65(1 [LexDoc Id : 415359]
|
HC (Karnataka) |
2011 |
Starline Agency vs Nabajit Das
[LexDoc Id : 428413]
|
HC (Gauhati) |
2011 |
Krishi Enterprises vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 419838]
|
HC (Orissa) |
2011 |
Sri Lakshmi Venkateswara Industries vs CTO and Ors.
[LexDoc Id : 422784]
|
HC (Andhra Pradesh) |
2011 |
| |
| First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | Next | Last |
| |
