w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



R.K. Refreshment & Enterprises (P) Ltd. and Others V/S CCE, Raipur


Company & Directors' Information:- R A ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1995PTC071831

Company & Directors' Information:- C & C ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31909TG1992PTC014513

Company & Directors' Information:- R K ENTERPRISES PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U51909CH1984PTC005941

Company & Directors' Information:- R K ENTERPRISES PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U51901HR1985PTC020754

Company & Directors' Information:- RK ENTERPRISES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70100MP2010PTC024132

    Appeal No. Appeal Nos. ST/55322, 58124/2013 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. Commissioner/RPR/ST/77-78/2012 dated 16.10.2012 passed by Commissioner CE & CCE, Raipur) and Final Order Nos. 50298-50299/2018

    Decided On, 22 January 2018

    At, Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi

    By, THE HONORABLE JUSTICE: DR. SATISH CHANDRA
    By, (PRESIDENT) & THE HONORABLE JUSTICE: B. RAVICHANDRAN
    By, MEMBER

    For Petitioner: Rinki Arora, Advocate And For Respondents: P. Juneja and A.K. Singh, AR



Judgment Text


1. These two appeals are on similar disputes and are considered together.

A) Appeal No. ST/55322/2013

2. This appeal is against order dated 16.10.2012 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur. The appellants are engaged in providing various taxable services, mainly in pursuance of contractual arrangements with Indian Railways and Catering Tourism Corporation Limited (IRCTC). After conducting audit of the accounts of the appellant, the Revenue entertained a view that they are not discharging Service Tax on certain activities undertaken/considerations received. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated against them to demand Service Tax which was not paid for the period April, 2005 to March, 2011, by way of issue of two SCNs. Both the notices were adjudicated resulting in the present impugned order. The original authority confirmed tax liability under various categories and also imposed penalties under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. A total tax demand of Rs. 97,55,397/- was confirmed against the appellant. The tax demands were under various categories and some were admitted and paid by the appellant. The appellants contested only 5 components of the demand confirmed in the impugned order.

3. We have heard both the ld. Counsel for the appellant and the ld. AR for the Revenue and perused the appeal record including the impugned order. We take up the disputed activities for tax liability one by one.

i) Cleaning Services (Rs. 3,09,194/-)

The appellants were engaged in cleaning of railway coaches and toilets in the said coaches. The original authority confirmed tax liability under cleaning service. Section 65(195)(zzzd) read with Section 65(24b) of the Finance Act, 1994 is relevant in the tax levy. The "cleaning activity" is defined as cleaning, including, specialized cleaning services, such as, disinfecting, ex-terminating or sterilizing of objects or premises of (i) Commercial or industrial building and premises thereof; or (ii) factory, plant or machinery, tank or reservoir of such commercial or industrial buildings and premises thereof, but does not include such services in relation to agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry or dairying. It is clear that cleaning is with reference to objects or premises of commercial or industrial building, factory and premises thereof. The original authority gave a reason that railway coaches are either standing on platform or running on the track and the same are to be considered as object on the premises for Indian railway holding railway coaches and contracts constituents of capital assets and machinery of Indian railway, the original authority held cleaning of such railway coaches will be considered as cleaning of commercial premises. The coaches are rolling stock of railways. They are for transport mode and cannot fall under the commercial object of industrial building, factory, plant or machinery, etc. The interpretation of the original authority is far-fetched and not sustainable in view of the plain meaning of the statutory definition for tax entry.

ii) Supply of Bed Rolls to Passengers of Railways (Rs. 14,87,724/-)

We note that the original authority confirmed service tax liability on the consideration received by the appellant from IRCTC for supply of bed rolls to the travelling passengers in AC coaches. This matter has already come up before the Tribunal in various cases. It has been held that such activities cannot be taxed under Business Support Service. We note that the board's clarification dated 23.02.2009 is relevant in this regard. BSS is a generic service providing support to business of commerce of the service receiver. In M/s. Food world Railways and Institutional Caterers TIOL 2284 Cestat-Delhi and in Shri R.C. Goyal Final Order No. 55661-55665/2017 dated 02.08.2017, the Tribunal held that such services cannot be considered as BSS. It is more appropriately classifiable under Business Auxiliary Service as it is essentially a customer care service provided on behalf of the client. The demand confirmed under BSS for such activity is not sustainable.

iii) Outdoor Catering Service (Rs. 16,94,320/-)

The service tax liability confirmed under this heading is mainly contested on the correctness of quantification. The appellants contested that the bill raised by them to IRCTC is inclusive of VAT. VAT is to be excluded to arrive at taxable value for service tax. The appellant pleaded that though the bill was raised for gross amount, IRCTC paid amount after deducting said VAT. The appellant paid service tax on the amount so received. In other words, the tax is paid on received amount not on billed amount which included element of VAT. We are in agreement with the claim of the appellant. The jurisdictional authority can verify the documents to satisfy the correctness of quantification of tax liability as claimed by the appellant.

iv) Supply of newspaper to passengers in Rajdhani train (Rs. 2,37,841/-)

The appellants supplied newspapers to the passengers in selected trains. It is part of their overall contracts involving supply of food, refreshment, etc. The original authority held that supply of newspapers is in relation to outdoor catering, as such, the same is liable to be taxed as part of outdoor catering service. He relied on the principle of classification of taxable service in terms of Section 65 clause 2 sub-clause (b) of the Finance Act, 1994. We note that the original authority grossly erred in considering supply of newspaper as part of outdoor catering service. In fact, the amount attributable to supply of newspaper is clearly identified, though a part of composite contract with the IRCTC Rs. 2/- per passenger has been earmarked for supply of newspaper. We note that when there are identified specific activities, though part of a general contract involving both taxable and non-taxable activity, it is not proper to invoke the provisions of Section 65 to decide classification. The said provision is applicable when there were composite services with combination of different services. Supply of newspaper is an activity with a specific consideration identified in the contract. First of all, the original authority should have identified whether such supply of newspaper is a taxable activity, then the question of deciding the combination of multiple taxable services should have been dealt with. In the present case, the original authority upheld the tax liability on the consideration received for supply of newspaper only on the ground that it is part of a composite contract of catering and on board service. We note that the reasoning adopted by the original authority to consider the supply of newspaper as part of their catering service is not sustainable. Accordingly, the tax liability cannot be sustained on this dispute.

4. The appellants contested the demands of limitation as well as for imposition of penalties. The original authority justified the demand for extended period on the ground that the appellants contravened the provisions of Finance Act and Rules with an intention to evade payment of duty. We note that the tax liability with reference to service rendered to railway/railway passengers has been a subject of substantial litigation. In fact, the Railways resisted the service tax applicability by repeated representations to the Ministry of Finance. Hon'ble Delhi High Court, while examining of dispute between IRCTC and Government of NCT Delhi-2010 (20) STR 437 Delhi, held that for supply of goods in the Indian railways, there is no element of service tax at all. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court interpreted the provisions of VAT and Service Tax under outdoor catering service. The Board, vide their circular dated 01.08.2006, clarified about the tax liability and quantification of value with reference to catering service provided by IRCTC.

5. Having considered the submissions made by the appellants and the impugned order, we find that the contested service tax liability on the categories mentioned above are not sustainable for the reasons recorded therein. The demand for extended period also cannot be sustained in respect of cases where service tax liability was affirmed in connection with service to Railways/IRCTC. On the same reasons, the penalties imposed on the appellant are also set-aside. As already observed in this order, factual verifications with supported documents, wherever the claim of the appellants are allowed on legal principles, can be made by the jurisdictional service tax authorities. With this observation, the appeal is allowed.

(B) Appeal No. ST/58124/2013

6. In this appeal also, the dispute is substantially on the points discussed above. Ratio and finding recorded in the above appeal will be applicable for the same disputes in the present appeal also.

7. Other than above points, we note that there is a demand for Rs. 11,47,291/- under the category of renting of immoveable property service. The appellants are not contesting the tax liability. They only requested for waiver of penalty invoking provisions of Section 80. The original authority declined to waive penalty on the ground that the appellants have not paid the Service Tax within the time mention under Section 80(2). We note that though the said sub-section was basically with reference to renting of immovable property service, the main Section 80 is still available to the appellant considering that the tax liability under renting of immoveable service was

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

subject matter of various disputes, amendments, including retrospective amendment. As such, the penalty imposed on this service is waived invoking provisions of Section 80. 8. A short payment of Rs. 1,99,255/- was confirmed under Business Auxiliary Service. The appellants submitted that by a clerical mistake, they have shown the consideration under BAS, which in fact, is a Tour Operators Service. The appellants only filed copy of ST-3 return along with details of bill realized during the relevant period. From this, we are unable to infer the correctness of the claim of the appellants. No supporting evidence has been presented before the original authority or even before us. As such, we are not able to accept the claim of the appellant against the demand. 9. The appellants have not contested their tax liability under renting of immoveable property service and IPR service. The tax liability has been paid with interest. 10. In view of above findings, the appeals filed by the appellants are allowed to the extent mentioned above.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

21-07-2020 Sanyog Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union Territory of J&K & Others High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
30-06-2020 Union Bank of India, Through Shri R. Rajendra Prasad, Branch Manager, Raichur Versus M/s. Tirumala Enterprises, Raichur National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
15-06-2020 Integrated Enterprises India Ltd. & Another Versus Ippili Krishna Surekha Rao & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
12-05-2020 Sri Rama Enterprises Versus State Bank of India High Court of Andhra Pradesh
08-05-2020 AVR Enterprises Versus Union of India High Court of Delhi
10-03-2020 M/s. Aarthi Enterprises, Rep. by its Partner Mrs.G. Mythili V/S Southern Railways, Rep. by the General Manager, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-03-2020 Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur Versus M/s. Chetak Enterprises Private Limited Supreme Court of India
03-03-2020 M/s. Deluxe Enterprises, H.P. Versus Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Punjab National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
02-03-2020 M/s. Nitish Enterprises, Stockist & Commission Agents, Vaikam & Others Versus Karnataka Soaps & Detergents Ltd, having its Registered office at Bangalore, Regional cum Branch office at Chennai, Rep. by its Authorized Representative, S. Muthaian High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-02-2020 M/s. S.S. Enterprises, Rep. by its Proprietrix S. Sumathi, Through her power agent R. Sivaramakrishnan Versus The District Collector, Erode High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-02-2020 M/s. Hansa Enterprises, Rep by its Proprietrix Pinky Jain Versus The Principal Commissioner & Commissioner of Commercial Taxes & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-02-2020 Prosound Products Partnership Firm, Rep. by its Partner Pradeep Ahuja & Another Versus John Enterprises, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-02-2020 M/s. NUDPL Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Versus Saiprasad Natarajan & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-02-2020 M/s. Zee Telefilms Ltd. (Now Known as Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd.) Versus Suresh Productions & Others Supreme Court of India
21-02-2020 BWCI Pension Trustees Limited Versus Estra Enterprises Private Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-02-2020 Batliboi Renewable Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd., (Formerly known as Batliboi EnXco Pvt. Ltd.,) Represented by Rajiv, Senior Manager (Accounts) Versus M/s. Sri Vinayaga Enterprises, Represented by its Proprietor R. Ganesan High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-02-2020 CP Cell, Directorate General Ordnance Service, Informant Master General of Ordnance Service, CP Cell/OS Dte, New Delhi V/S M/s AVR Enterprises, Kanpur & Another Competition Commission of India
18-02-2020 Antikeros Shipping Corporation Versus Adani Enterprises Limited High Court of Judicature at Bombay
18-02-2020 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited A Government of India Enterprises, Delhi & Others Versus Gopal Prasad Jaiswal High Court of Chhattisgarh
14-02-2020 M/s. Kumar Enterprises A Registerd Partnership Firm, Represented by its Manager R. Shivakumar Versus Union of India, Represented by its Secretary Ministry of Coal & Mines Department of Mines Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi & Others High Court of Karnataka
14-02-2020 The Superintending Engineer, General Construction, TANTRANSCO Ltd., Tatabad, Coimbatore & Another Versus Micro Small Enterprises Facilitation Council and Director of Industries and Commerce, Represented by its Chairman, Guindy & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-02-2020 Dr. Monidipa Ghosh Versus M/s. Rosni Enterprises Rep. by sole prop., Prabuddha Bhattacharyya & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
11-02-2020 M/s. Anusha Enterprises Rep.by its Managing Partner C.K.Nafrasimha Rao, Chennai Versus Government of India, Department of Atomic Energy General Services Organisation Kalpakkam & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-02-2020 John Enterprises, Madurai V/S Prosound Products, Rep. by its Partner Pradeep Ahuja, Mumbai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-02-2020 Syndicate Bank V/S Alaknanda Enterprises and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Delhi
04-02-2020 M/s. Siddhi Vinayak Enterprises represented by its Proprietor R. Devika Versus The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager Southern Railway Divisional Railway Manager's Office Commercial Branch, Park Town Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-02-2020 Bank of Baroda V/S M.S. Enterprises and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Aurangabad
31-01-2020 Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. & Others Versus Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. & Others High Court of Delhi
24-01-2020 Sri Narasu's Coffee Company Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, P. Sivanantham, Salem Versus Narasu's Saarathy Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, M.V. Balasubramanian, Salem High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-01-2020 M/s. Harinath Enterprises, rep. by its Proprietor, G. Kaspa Reddy & Others Versus The State of Telangana, rep. by its Prl Secretary, Municipal Administration Department, BRKR Bhavan, Hyderabad & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
14-01-2020 M/s. Allied Enterprises Versus Rekha Basu & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
10-01-2020 M/s. J.P. Electrical Enterprises Chandrapur Prop. Priyavanda & Others Versus The Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
10-01-2020 M/s.Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited, Chennai Versus Nirmal Kumar Maheswari Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-01-2020 Jaaacsons Enterprises V/S C.C.E. & S.T.-Mangalore Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Regional Bench, Bangalore
02-01-2020 Allahabad Bank V/S Om Sai Enterprises and Others. Debts Recovery Tribunal Patna
02-01-2020 M/s. QuestNet Enterprises India Pvt. Ltd., Represented by Pushpam Appala Naidu & Another Versus The Inspector of Police, Crime Branch CID, Egmore, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-12-2019 Global United Shipping India Private Limited, (formerly known as Jalhansa Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.), Represented by its Director, Prem Kumar Menon, Chennai Versus Traffic Manager, Chennai Port Trust, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-12-2019 M/s. MCP Enterprises, Thrissur, Represented by Its' Executive Partner, M.C. Mohammed Kutty & Others Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary, Taxes Department, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
16-12-2019 M/s. Taranga Technologies, Andhra Pradesh Versus M/s. Neels Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-12-2019 P.T. Joseph, Proprietor, Cheryl Enterprises, Elamakkara, Ernakulam Versus Kabeer Husain Minanna & Others High Court of Kerala
04-12-2019 M/s. S.V. Enterprises Represented by Proprietor M. Srinivas Naidu Versus V. Tulasiram High Court of Karnataka
03-12-2019 M/s. G.S. Enterprises & Another Versus Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation & Another High Court of for the State of Telangana
02-12-2019 Union Bank of India Versus Anjali Enterprises & Others Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Allahabad
15-11-2019 M/s. Devashi Enterprises, Rep. by its Proprietor Vasanth Kumar Versus The Joint Commissioner (CT), Enforcement I, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-11-2019 M/s. Indu Projects Limited, rep. by its Chief Operating Officer, B.V. Bhaskar Reddy Versus Telangana Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, rep. by its Chairman, Commissionerate of Industries, Hyderabad & Another High Court of for the State of Telangana
07-11-2019 The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Funds Organisation, Chennai Versus Deccan Enterprises, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-10-2019 Karma Enterprises, Kozhikode, Represented by Its Managing Partner K.M. Sasidharan Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Deputy Commissioner (Law, Commercial Taxes), Ernakulam High Court of Kerala
24-10-2019 Dr. Murali Krishnan, Proprietor, Sri Anjaneya Enterprises, Chennai Versus M/s. Glider Pharma Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Presently known as National Medicines Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, Naresh Kumar, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-10-2019 M/s. Giriraj Enterprises Versus State of Karnataka High Court of Karnataka
22-10-2019 Konkan Irrigation Development Corporation, Kopri Colony, Thane (E) & Another Versus M/s. F.A. Enterprises & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
18-10-2019 M/s. Nic Arts, Chennai Versus M/s. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd, Mumbai High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-10-2019 M/s. Shree Senthil Enterprises, Registered Partnership Firm, by its Partner, Chitra Parimala, Coimbatore Versus Employees State Insurance Corporation, Sub-Regional Office, Coimbatore & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-10-2019 Himagiri Enterprises Private Limited Versus The State of Telangana High Court of for the State of Telangana
17-10-2019 Adani Enterprises Limited & Another Versus Union of India, through Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
11-10-2019 M/s. Shubham Enterprises Versus K. Srinivas Rao & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
10-10-2019 Balaji Enterprises, Through Proprietor, Shri K.K. Tomar Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Chandigarh National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-10-2019 Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. Versus K.S. Infraspace LLP & Another Supreme Court of India
27-09-2019 The Management of Piramal Enterprises Ltd., Chennai Versus Assistant Commissioner of Labour, (Controlling Authority for the Payment of Gratuity Act), Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-09-2019 Swastika Enterprises, Represented by Its Proprietor Mohanlal Gupta & Another Versus State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
03-09-2019 Jiten Chandra Talukdar Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary Ministry of Micro & Small Medium Enterprises (MSME), New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
19-08-2019 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7, Mumbai V/S Piramal Enterprises Ltd High Court of Judicature at Bombay
14-08-2019 High Ground Enterprises Ltd. Versus Union of India Through the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, Branch Secretariat & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
30-07-2019 Vaishali Enterprises, Vaishali & Others Versus The Indian Railway, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
25-07-2019 Compack Enterprises India (P) Ltd. Versus Beant Singh High Court of Delhi
16-07-2019 The Branch Manager, Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd, Chinnakkada Branch, Kollam District Versus S. Jeni Devi Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
12-07-2019 L.G.R. Enterprises, Represented by its Propreitrix Sindu @ Lakshmi & Others Versus P. Anbazhagan High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-07-2019 Anil Enterprises & Another Versus Akash Pateriya Chhatisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Raipur
03-07-2019 Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Versus Gajanan Pankar Enterprises & Another Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Panaji
21-06-2019 M/s. Sunbeam Enterprises & Others Versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
03-06-2019 M/s. Galaxy Enterprises Versus State of Maharashtra & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
31-05-2019 M/s. Gopalan Enterprises, A Firm Represented by its Managing Partner C. Gopalan Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Stamps, Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
31-05-2019 Shabnam Dhillon Versus Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. & Others High Court of Delhi
30-05-2019 Govind Enterprises Versus State of U.P. & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
24-05-2019 Samsung India Electronics Private Limited Versus MGR Enterprises & Others High Court of Delhi
24-05-2019 The Union of India, Represented by General Manager & Others Versus M/s. Mineral Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Represented by its Head Logistics, Srinivas Murthy High Court of Karnataka
10-05-2019 M/s. Navdhaan Enterprises, Chennai Versus Union of India, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-05-2019 Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. & Others Versus Shobha Arora & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-05-2019 M/s New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Another Versus M/s. Luxra Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. & Another Supreme Court of India
18-04-2019 Siddhivinayak Enterprises & Another Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
15-04-2019 Dipali Enterprises, Nilanga Versus Sanjay In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
10-04-2019 The Superintendent Regulated Market Committee Panruti Versus Pioneer Cashews Enterprises Rep. by its Proprietor Sivasubramanian & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-04-2019 M/s. Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Limited, Represented by its Manager – Legal Versus State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Principal Secretary to the Government (Public Department) & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-03-2019 Adani Enterprises Limited Versus Antikeros Shipping Corporation High Court of Judicature at Bombay
18-03-2019 Mahalingam Exports, Vi. Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Rep. by its Proprietor P. Mahalingam Versus The Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary, Department of Micro Small & Medium Enterprises, Secretariat, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-03-2019 M/s. Ruchi Enterprises & Others Versus M/s. Fullerton India Credit Company Ltd. High Court of Delhi
08-03-2019 M/s. Swathi Enterprises Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-03-2019 Chowdeshwari Enterprises, Rajarajeshwarinagar, Bangalore & Others Versus State of Karnataka & Others High Court of Karnataka
05-03-2019 Oricon Enterprises Ltd Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-02-2019 M/s. Omega Enterprises, Rep. by its Sole Proprietor Ramiah, Mumbai Versus Ministry of Civil Aviation, Rep. by its Secretary, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-02-2019 Mahaguj Collieries Limited Versus Adani Enterprises Limited High Court of Judicature at Bombay
21-02-2019 M.K. Enterprises Through its Proprietor Moin Khan & Others Versus Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
14-02-2019 J. Sooryakanth, Sr. Asst (Staff Code 6591) Ksfe Limited, Sreekariyam Branch, Thiruvananthapuram Versus The Kerala State Financial Enterprises Limited, Represented By The Managing Director, Head Office, Thrissur & Others High Court of Kerala
14-02-2019 Central Board of Trustees Versus M/s. Standing Conference of Public Enterprises (Scope) High Court of Delhi
06-02-2019 New India Assurance Co. Ltd Versus New Padma Enterprises & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
05-02-2019 The State of Tamil Nadu rep. By the Joint Commissioner (CT), Chennai Versus Tvl. Sharada Enterprises, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-01-2019 M/s. Jay A.R. Enterprises, Partnership firm having Office at No.7, Chennai Versus M/s. Scraft Traders, Rep by its Proprietor, Kolkotta High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-01-2019 M/s. Ajmer Enterprises & Others Versus Debt Recovery Tribunal & Another High Court of Punjab and Haryana
04-01-2019 Sharvani Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of U.P. & Another High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
03-01-2019 M/s. Kannan Enterprises, Coimbatore Versus The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by its Joint Commissioner (CT), Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-01-2019 S. Satheez Versus Royal. T. Devakumar, Proprietor TDK Enterprises, Erode High Court of Judicature at Madras