site stats

State of jharkhand vs ambay cements

WebSTATE OF JHARKHAND v. AMBAY CEMENTS , C.A. No.-007994-007994 / 2003, WebJan 10, 2024 · State of Jharkhand v. Ambay Cements, 2005. In this case, it was held that the provisions of the law should be strictly constructed, it should not be let open for the court to interpret, the court cannot ignore the conditions prescribed in the provision. Wherever there is a mandatory rule it must be strictly followed, when a statute explicitly ...

STATE OF JHARKHAND vs AMBAY CEMENTS. Supreme Court, 17 …

WebFeb 3, 2024 · , 2024 Latest Caselaw 499 Jhar WebIn State of Jharkhand v. Ambay Cements (2005) 1 SCC 368 = 178 ELT 55 = 139 STC 74 = 2004 AIR SCW 6703 (SC 3 member bench), it was held as follows, ‘(a) Provision of … roofing ottawa https://beaucomms.com

Strict Construction of Penal Statues - Strict construction is

WebNov 17, 2004 · STATE OF JHARKHAND vs AMBAY CEMENTS. Supreme Court, 17-11-2004 Judgment Cited in Precedent Map Related Vincent http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT … WebState Of Jharkhand & Ors vs Ambay Cements & Anr on 17 November, 2004 Author: . A Lakshmanan Bench: S.N. Variava, Dr. Ar. Lakshmanan, S.H. Kapadia CASE NO.: … WebState of Jharkhand Vs. Ambay Cements, (2005)1 SCC 368 [Para 15,22,23] JUDGMENT. V. M. KANADE, J.:- By this Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners are seeking the following reliefs. roofing ottery

STRICT VERSUS LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION - Taxmann

Category:CENVAT without physical movement of goods illegal - TaxGuru

Tags:State of jharkhand vs ambay cements

State of jharkhand vs ambay cements

Canara Bank vs Pravir Sharan 2024 Latest Caselaw 477 Jhar

WebMar 6, 2024 · Ambay Cements9 and JCT Electronics Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Vadodara10 16. On the question as to whether two show cause notices could have been issued for the same period, learned Departmental Representative asserts that the case laws relied upon by the appellant are not applicable to this case. WebAMBAY CEMENT STATE OF JHARKHAND Vs. AMBAY CEMENT LAWS (SC)-2004-11-16 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: JHARKHAND) Decided on November 17,2004 STATE …

State of jharkhand vs ambay cements

Did you know?

WebJan 15, 2003 · Ambay Cements, Dhanbad v. State Of Jharkhand And OthersJharkhand High Court(Jan 15, 2003)Jan 15, 2003 Subsequent References CaseIQTM(AI … WebJan 5, 2016 · He relied on the case law reported in State of Jharkhand Vs Ambay Cements - 2004 (178) ELT 55 (SC ). He submits that interpretation of rule has to be strictly construed …

WebNov 25, 2014 · 9. On the other hand, it is argued on behalf of the State of Jharkhand that this Court in State of M.P v. Union of India recorded an erroneous conclusion. According to the … WebNov 17, 2024 · In State of Jharkhand v. Ambay Cements, it was held that: (SCC p. 378, para 26) 26.... it is the cardinal rule of interpretation that where a statute provides that a particular thing should be done, it should be done in the manner prescribed and not in …

WebOct 13, 2024 · State of Jharkhand v Ambay Cements, (2005) 1 SCC 368; ; Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd., 2024 (2) SCC 158; The Constitution Bench, in Commissioner. of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co 2024 (9) SCC 1.) and difference in character of EMPLOYER & EMPLOYEE contribution (SC Held: WebIn State of Jharkhand v. Ambay Cements, the Supreme Court held that it is settled rule of interpretation that where a statute is penal in character, it must be strictly construed and followed. The basic rule of strict construction of a penal statute is that a person cannot be penalized without a clear letter of the law. Presumptions or ...

WebNotification was to be scrupulously followed to avail benefit of notification Court followed the judgements of State of Jharkhand & Ors vs. Ambay Cements & Anr (2004 (11) TMI 319 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ) and Mihir Textile Ltd. Vs CCE (1997 (4) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) - We do appreciate the difficulty of the appellant.

WebOct 13, 2024 · State of Jharkhand v Ambay Cements, (2005) 1 SCC 368; ; Commissioner of Income Tax v. Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd., 2024 (2) SCC 158; The Constitution Bench, in Commissioner. of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co 2024 (9) SCC 1.) and difference in character of EMPLOYER & EMPLOYEE contribution (SC Held: “.. roofing outlet londonWebThe State of Jharkhand has duly adopted the Bihar Sales Tax Laws and the notifications issued pursuant thereto. 4. In the said Industrial policy under Clause 16.1 and 16.2 new … roofing outlet hillside njWebState of Jharkhand Vs Ambay Cement (2005) 1 SCC 368 Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. V CTO, Calcutta, (1965) 3 SCR 626 He submits that as there is no confusion in Notification No. 39 (RE- 2007)/2004-09 dated 16.10.2007 and as the importer did not open an irrevocable commercial letter of credit, the import cannot be permitted. 4. roofing outlet deliveryroofing outfittersWebMar 27, 2024 · Ambay Cements and another4 to buttress the argument that when the language is plain and unambiguous and the provision penal in nature, the same must be strictly construed and the courts should not do violence to the provision by reading and/or adding something that is not intended by the legislature. 13. roofing outlet promo codeWebFeb 3, 2024 · Jharkhand High Court; Karnataka High Court; Kerala High Court; Madras High Court; Madhya Pradesh High Court; Meghalaya High Court; Manipur High Court; Orissa … roofing outlet reviewsWebDec 22, 2024 · (iii) In the case of State of Jharkhand and others vs. Ambay Cements and another, (2005 Sales Tax Cases Vol.129). The relevant extract of the said judgment is quoted from the Head Note below for ready reference : “An exception or an exempting provision in a taxing statute should be construed strictly. roofing outlet near me