The ITAT deleted the adjustment in respect of international transaction of Payment of Interest on Fully Convertible Debentures by upholding the contentions that LIBOR was not applicable as there was no lending/borrowing in foreign currency and assessee had issued rupee dominated debentures.
The Honble Madras High Court observed that Juxtaposing the provisions of both the Acts viz., Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Tamil Nadu Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Collection of Capitation Fee) Act, 1992, with each other, it is explicit that collection of any amount in excess of what has been prescribed as fee or in the nature of donation or voluntary contribution either directly or indirectly to the institution or through some other person or institution or trust, as quid pro quo for the seat in any educational institution, would render the activity of both the entities ungenuine.
The ITAT by relying upon the Judgment of co-ordinate Bench, wherein co-ordinate Bench followed the Judgment of Jurisdictional High Court have observed that 15% of the revenue relating to bookings made from India being attributable to the taxpayers PE in India after considering the nature and extent of activities in India and abroad and assets employed & risk assumed.
SC held that the exclusion of an industrial area or areas from the limits of municipal councils or municipalities under the state laws in exercise of statutory power or by virtue of a declaration under proviso to Article 243-Q, would not result in that area ceasing to be a local area within Entry 52 of List II.
Delhi High Court held that Registrar of Trade Marks has no power to condone delay in the filing of an application seeking review beyond expiry of one month from date of decision of which review is sought.
Delhi High Court on the issue of invention under Patents Act, 1970 observed that one of the sure tests in analysing the existence of inventive step would also be the time gap between the prior art document and the invention under consideration. If a long time has passed since the prior art was published and a simple change resulted in unpredictable advantages which no one had thought of for a long time, the Court would tilt in favour of holding that the invention is not obvious.
The Delhi High Court observed that on the issue of phonetic similarity in the two trademarks, the test to be applied is of a man of average intelligence and of imperfect recollection. To such a man, the overall structural and phonetic similarity and the similarity of the idea in the two marks is reasonably likely to cause a confusion between them.
The Honble High Court observed that in terms of Section 30 of the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923, a challenge to the order of a Commissioner can be made only on a substantial question of law. The present case was totally factual in nature and no substantial question of law took place.
Delhi High Court held that the remedy of arbitration provided in section 11 of the SARFAESI Act cannot override the special remedies stipulated under the set of special laws, and therefore even statutory arbitration cannot derogate from a remedy available to a lender for enforcing a security interest and the doctrine of election is simply not available. Quite clearly, matters covered by special laws, which create special rights, to be adjudicated and enforced by special forums, under special procedures, in this case the DRT, are non-arbitrable.
Honble Supreme Court held that the doctrine of promissory estoppel shall not be applicable to a policy decision with respect to incentive, when it is well within the right of DGFT/appropriate authority/Union to come out with a new Exim Policy.
