2020 SCC Vol. 9 Part 3
Central Excise Act, 1944 — Ss. 4(1)(a) and (b) (as existing prior to 1-7-2000) r/w Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 — Normal
Central Excise Act, 1944 — Ss. 4(1)(a) and (b) (as existing prior to 1-7-2000) r/w Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 — Normal
Allahabad High Court: Dr Y.K. Srivastava, J., expressed while deciding the present application that: “Proceeding for interim maintenance, shall as far as
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): C. Viswanath (Presiding Member) expressed that: Law is settled that illegal and forceful means cannot be
Allahabad High Court: The Division Bench of Ved Prakash Vaish and Vikas Kunvar Srivastav, JJ., expressed that: “Justice demands that courts should
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul* and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ., has observed that Section 6 of Probation of Offenders
UPDATE: This Judgment of the Bombay High Court has now been reversed by a 3-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India
Central Information Commission (CIC): Neeraj Kumar Gupta (Information Commissioner) held that: “Since filing of the Income Tax Returns by an individual with
Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench of S.A. Bobde, CJ and L. Nageswara Rao and Vineet Saran, JJ., dismissed a review petition while
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund
Kerala High Court: In an interesting case regarding custody of a major the Division Bench of K. Vinod Chandran and M.R. Anitha,
Uttaranchal High Court: Lok Pal Singh, J., allowed a writ petition which was filed seeking for a writ of certiorari to quash
Punjab and Haryana High Court:The Division Bench of Ravi Shanker Jha, CJ. and Arun Palli, J., upheld the impugned order of Single
Delhi High Court: J.R. Midha, J., while addressing a motor accidents claim application decided on the issue whether it would be fair to
Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench of Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah, JJ., issued directions in a case wherein a
Chhattisgarh High Court: A Division Bench of P.R. Ramchandra Menon and Parth Prateem Sahu JJ., dismissed the appeal being devoid of merits.
Jharkhand High Court: Anubha Rawat Choudhary J., while setting aside the impugned order, reiterated, “…once the institute is recognized as a minority
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): C. Viswanath (Presiding Member) observed that: “Conduct of the insured becomes relevant on the facts of
Karnataka High Court: Suraj Govindaraj J., dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such that two
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of P.K. Choudhary (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) allowed
by Niyati Karia and Urvi Jinsiwale*