The Supreme Court held that failure to offer fit-out possession within the contractually agreed period entitled homebuyers to terminate the agreement and seek a refund with interest. Consumer fora cannot override express contractual rights.
The Supreme Court held that review jurisdiction cannot be used to reargue issues already decided on merits. It found no error apparent on the face of the record and dismissed the review petition.
The Supreme Court ruled that an employee performing managerial and supervisory duties, supported by documentary evidence and job responsibilities, falls outside the definition of “workman” under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act.
The Delhi High Court held that ₹25 lakh paid under a prior agreement to sell was deductible under Section 48(i) as it was incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with the eventual transfer of the property.
The Chennai ITAT held that payments received by a UAE resident could not be taxed as Fees for Technical Services in India because the India-UAE DTAA lacks an FTS provision. In the absence of a Permanent Establishment, the income was treated as business profits not taxable in India.
The Supreme Court cancelled bail granted in a POCSO murder case, holding that the High Court failed to adequately consider the seriousness of the allegations, supporting material on record, and severity of punishment.
The Jodhpur ITAT held that deduction under Section 80GGC cannot be denied merely on allegations against a political party in the absence of evidence showing any benefit returned to the donor.
The Court ruled that confiscation proceedings before Customs Authorities do not amount to prosecution before a judicial tribunal. Consequently, subsequent criminal prosecution for the same act was held not to violate Article 20(2).
The Rajasthan High Court held that an order restoring appeals through review proceedings is not separately appealable under the Benami Act. The Court ruled that Order 47 Rule 7 CPC barred such challenges.
The Supreme Court refused anticipatory bail, holding that the High Court had rightly found prima facie material indicating involvement in the alleged liquor syndicate. The Court emphasized that serious corruption allegations warranted an unhindered investigation.
