Simran Law Finding An Chandigarh Advocate - Know Some Basics SimranLaw 815 Sector 16 D Chandigarh 160015
Advocate Simranjeet Singh Sidhu - https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/simranjeet-law-associates. Pursuant to the modification of the interim order, the High Court completed the selection process of filling up of the notified vacancies of 2008 by way of promotion. This exemption was questioned by manufacturers of edible oils from other States on the ground that the same was discriminatory and violative of Articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution. Relying upon a decision of two-Judge Bench of this Court in Shree Mahavir Oil Mills and Anr. e investment by way of CCDs in Vinca and Vinca purporting to invest the said amounts in OPCDs of Amazia and Rubix) was devised/adopted as follows: 418 crores, the investment structure (i.
" On the same day the following order was made on that petition:-- " Heard learned pleaders for the parties. 2 That FMO, a foreign entity wanted to invest a substantial sum by way of FDI in a slum rehabilitation project being undertaken in Mumbai by Rubix and an Industrial Park being undertaken/ owned by Amazia. The remaining 41% Class A equity shares in Vinca are owned by the individual promoters of the Defendant, being Hemant Shah and Vyomesh Shah, which entitles them to 41% of the voting rights and economic interest in Vinca.
import and export across customs frontiers. That was a case where the State Government had totally exempted goods manufactured by small scale industries within the State from payment of sales tax even when the sales tax payable by other industries including manufacturers of goods in Advocate Simranjeet Singh Sidhu adjoining States was in the range of 8%. Entries 43 and 44 relate to incorporation, regulation and winding up of corporations. 5% per annum on its investment of Rs. (1996) 2 SCC 39 it was argued that exemptions in favour of locally produced goods from payment of taxes was constitutionally impermissible and offensive to article 304(a).
(d)(ii) lands, works, property and Advocate Simranjeet Singh Sidhu portions of the SYL canal and all lands within the alignment of the SYL canal within the territories of the State of Punjab which are covered by the judgments of this Court in State of Haryana v State of Punjab, (2002) 2 SCC 507 (paragraphs 18 and 19) and State of Haryana v State of Punjab, (2004) 12 SCC 712 (paragraph 96),. We may hasten to add that in the present case the investigation was carried out with unconcerned and uninspiring performance.
We feel that there are no compelling and substantial reasons for the High Court to interfere with the order of acquittal when the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the guilt of the accused. However, on completion of the exercise, vacancies will not be filled till further orders. It is, therefore, prayed that the attachment may be withdrawn. Turning to List II, Entries 1 to 44 form one group mentioning the subjects on which the States could legislate.
(hereinafter referred to as FMO) invested in certain equity shares and compulsorily convertible debentures (hereinafter referred to as the CCDs) of Vinca Developer Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Vinca). As a result of the said investment, FMO currently holds (i) 10% of the equity of Vinca through Class A Advocate Simranjeet Singh Sidhu shares and is entitled to 10% of the voting rights and economic interest in Vinca by virtue thereof; and (ii) 3 CCDs in Vinca.
FMO was however only willing to invest in the said projects on the basis of an assured/fixed return, which was and is not permissible under the FEMA Regulations/FDI Policy. On a further application filed, this Court on 5th August 2011 permitted the High Court to make appointments concerning the said selection process of 2008. State of Jammu and Kashmir and Ors. 118 of 1936 though that case was dismissed. On behalf of the assesses it was contended that grant of exemptions and incentives in favour of locally manufactured/produced goods is Advocate Simranjeet Singh Sidhu also one form of insidious discrimination which was impermissible in terms of article 304(a) for such exemptions and incentives had the effect of putting goods from another State at a disadvantage.
The first of these two dimensions touches upon the States power to promote industrial development by granting incentives including those in the nature of exemptions or reduced rates of levy on goods locally produced or manufactured. If these expressions are to be interpreted as including duties to be levied in respect of that trade and commerce, then Entry 83 which is Duties of customs including export duties would be wholly redundant. Entry 85 provides separately for corporation tax.
While we have at some length heard learned counsel for the parties on that aspect, we do not propose to deal with all the dimensions of that challenge based on Article 304(a) except two of them that were argued at great length by learned counsel for the parties. There was no firm and sincere effort with the needed zeal and spirit to bring home the guilt of the accused. They jointly ask me to cancel the attachment (existing by special order) in Money Ex. In 2009 and 2010, Nederlandse Financierings-Maatschappij voor Ontwikkelingslanden N.
To enable FMO to bypass/circumvent the said FEMA/FDI prohibitions and get a fixed return of 14. Further, as on date, the Defendant owns 49% of the equity of Vinca through Class A shares and is entitled to 49% of the voting rights and economic interest in Vinca by virtue thereof. The said order reads thus:
