Similarly, Digambar Jains also have an assembly known as the Digambar Samaj and under s. 8(3)(c) of the Act this assembly is entitled to elect five persons to the Board for Digambar Jain Religious Trust. nDuring the accounting year 1944-45 assessment year 1945-46), the Respondent Company received from its members the sum of Rs. First of all, it is disputed by the appellants and nothing is produced on record by the respondents to substantiate this plea.
nThis is equally true of prohibitions and limitations. The present appeal has been filed in pursuance of that certificate. For 1952 and 1953 the claim of the Union for bonus, the Industrial Tribunal held, was still weaker, because in those years there was still less available surplus for distribution as bonus to its workers, and so far as the second part of the claim of the Union, namely, Diamond Jubilee bonus, was concerned the Industrial Tribunal rejected it outright.
n[Emphasis Supplied] 25) We, thus, are of the opinion that appellants are deprived of proper and reasonable opportunity of persuading the authorities concerned to spare that part of the land which is not required for construction of Missing Link-II but is intended to be used for commercial purpose. It resulted in issuance of show cause notice to the Institute. Wockhardt Hospital in their Institute cannot amount to their having exercised the option to redeem the goods, which comes at a subsequent stage namely when the impugned order of adjudication is passed.
Now, the English rule was interpreted by the English Courts to create a liability irrespective of considerations arising from the general provisions of the income-tax divorce law firm in Chandigarh. 307/2004 has been filed by the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) against the same judgment and order dated 23rd July, 2002. We therefore hold that the duty demand is not sustainable and accordingly, set aside the same, however, if the absence of any challenge to the confiscation and to the imposition penalty, both are sustained.
After sometime, the Revenue authorities/respondent herein came to know that the Institute was committing breach of the aforesaid conditions, as it had not been providing free diagnostic treatment to at least 40 per cent of all its outdoor patients and it was also not giving free treatment to indoor patients having income of less than Rs. nThe Institute was not charged any import duty as it had produced requisite certificate dated 11. It is contended that these rules were, unfortunately, not brought to the notice of the High Court and that the decision rendered by the High Court accepting the Criminal Law firm in Chandigarh laid down in SAIL is incorrect.
Pertinently, this show cause notice dated 12. We are not influenced by the arguments of the respondents that in the drawings which were kept for inspection, this part of land is shown for commercial development. 500 per month and for this purpose, it had not got 10 per cent hospital beds reserved for such patients. 1991 issued by the Director General of Health Services, New Delhi. Section 8 of the Act recognises these differences; for example, there is an assembly’ of Swetambar Jains known as Shree Sangh and under s.
Nor was it correct to say that Art It was not, therefore, correct to say that the preamble could in any way limit the power of Parliament to cede parts of the national territory. In Eglinton Silica Brick Co. 15,687/- as subscription in’ respect of the Authorized Assistants 60,750/- as entrance fees, and the sum of Rs. The appellants then applied for Illegal Custody and Habeas Corpus Advocate in Chandigarh obtained a certificate from the High Court that the case fulfilled the requirements of Art.
That being so, the question is whether TISCO is entitled to refund of the excess royalty paid from 10th August, 1998 (the date of the decision in SAIL) to 25th September, 2000 and if so whether the High Court was right in denying that refund. The Labour Appellate Tribunal substantially affirmed the decision of the Industrial Tribunal and gave several reasons why the global profits of the Lipton, Ltd. , could not be taken into account for the payment of bonus to its workers in India.
133 of the Constitution. In this context, it must immediately be noted that the contention of the State of Jharkhand is not that Rule 64B and Rule 64C of the MCR have retrospective effect. Also, the question is whether TISCO is entitled to refund of royalty from 25th September, 2000 till June 2002 and if so, whether the High Court was right in denying that refund. sons to the Board of Swetambar Jain Religious Trust.
8(2)(c) of, the Act the Shree Sangh is entitled to elect five per-. In any case, we are of the view that such a drawing by itself would not meet the mandatory requirement of the Act in the absence of specific stipulation in this behalf in the notification itself 2000 was issued under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as Act) and after stating that the aforesaid breach was allegedly committed by the appellant, in the show cause notice, it was proposed as under: – “16.
Suti Mills Mazdoor Union, Kanpur (2). Marrian (1), the assessee company which had gone into voluntary liquidation in 1904 was carried on by the liquidator till 1921 when the business was sold to another company which took it over on October 5, 1921, and the business of the appellant company then ceased. The submission is that after the decision in SAIL the Government of India issued a notification dated 25th September, 2000 inserting Rule 64B and Rule 64C in the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (hereafter MCR) and as a result of this, Run-of-Mine (ROM) minerals, after being processed in the leased area are exigible to royalty on the processed mineral.