nrillegalservices The Tribunal was not inclined to accept this figure and, for rejecting nrillegalservices it, relied mainly on the evidence of R. The other aspect NRI Lawyers of this argument of fear is NRI Lawyers that we should not make the Constitution too flexible so that it may be open to the requisite majority with the requisite ratification to make changes too frequently in the Constitution. On an application to ECtHR, Mr Θ”ner claimed that his expulsion represented a breach of his article 8 rights. At para 58 it referred to two criteria in particular.
The Factory enjoyed the benefit of a private railway siding in the factory area. There was some discussion in argument of the extent to which the Department’s guidance to officers allowed for a degree of flexibility in the operation of the rules. It seems that this has proved to be a more onerous task than anticipated because of the number of versions in force at various times. This shunting operation consisted of taking wagons from line 1, placing them on lines 3 and 4, and bringing back the engine with empties to line 1.
(x) What the impugned Act purports to do is not to make any and legislation but to NRI Legal protect and validate the legislative measure passed by different State legislatures. This NRI provision was declaratory of the common law relating to insurance generally. On NRI February 27 and 28, 1961 the company loaded some wagons of paper after effecting clearance of these goods by payment of excise duty under r. It is said that the Constitution is an organic document for the governance of the country and it is expected to endure and give stability to the institution which it provides.
NRI Legal services as valid if a specified fee has not been paid”. It held a licence in Form L. As will be seen, this common law/statutory rule has recently been modified by statute, differentially for consumer insurance and non-consumer policies, but exacting duties of disclosure are still imposed on the applicant for insurance at the pre-contract stage. very true of a written federal Constitution. That is undoubtedly so and this is. Garnett, [1922] USSC 28; 258 U.
The guidance does recognise a measure of discretion to depart from requirements of the rules in particular cases. But it repeated and confirmed, setting them out in tabular form, what it described as the Boultif principles. 6, Umeshwar Prasad, a Traffic Inspector of the Railway, who had made a test-check of the shunting time on 10th October, 1959. 48,238/- was expended for lands sold by the respondent company and a sum of Rs.
Whatever the logic of that distinction, it is not suggested by either side that it throws any light on the issue before us. 64,340/- for expenses incurred by the, respondent company on account of land already sold by the vendor. The Income-tax Officer, in assessing the income for the assessment year 1950-51, originally accepted the cash basis and computed the income. The company’s factory and its premises were demarcated under the said Rules.
4, but the application for the adjudication of such a question when the receiver acts otherwise than under the order of a court would be covered by s. After the hearing the Treasury Solicitor has helpfully submitted a note on relevant parts of the guidance on “Specified application forms and procedures”. According to the report submitted by this witness, the shunting operation at the time of the test-check, on the whole, took 13 minutes. 130, National Prohibition Cases.
Out of the actual expenses paid out in cash amounting to Rs. This explains for example that, if an application received more than three months ago does not meet the specified form requirements, you “must use discretion and accept it as valid”, since otherwise the applicant might be “unfairly disadvantaged” by rejection at that stage. This was within the legislative competence of Parliament. This difference is explained as due to the fees requirement being in the regulations rather than the rules.
Later on, the respondent company adjusted its accounts on a cash system and submitted a revised return showing a loss of Rs. In 1960 a new siding was constructed outside the original factory premises; the company’s request to the Excise authorities to amend its licence so as to include the new railway siding in the factory area was refused. 4 under the Central Excise Act is prescribed by the Central Excise Rules. As already stated, the accounts, were kept in the account books of the respondent company on a mercantile system, for this period.
0 of the guidance valid from 9 May 2012 there is a section headed “Discretion” (p 46). Otherwise, no doubt, the consequence would either be difficulty obtaining insurance or, more likely, demands for higher premiums. The appellant company carried on in the State of Orissa the business of manufacturing and selling paper and boards. On the other hand: “You must not use discretion and accept an application . 68 and as such the period of limitation of twenty-one days would be attracted to any such application.
1,12,577/-, a sum of Rs.