Gourav Bansal Vs State of Haryana (Punjab & Haryana High Court) This common order shall dispose of above noted two petitions as they arise out of the same FIR. Prayer in these petitions, filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is for grant of regular bail to petitioners Gourav Bansal and Surender […]
Held that just because the parties have chosen a foreign-seated institutional arbitration under the UNCITRAL Law, it cannot be presumed that an agreement is excluded from the applicability of Section 9
Held that an independent director, not in charge or not responsible for day to day conduct of the business, is not liable for offence by invoking section 141 of Negotiable Instrument Act.
ITO admits that principle of judicial discipline mandates that the lower authorities are bound to follow the orders passed by the higher authorities. He expresses his unconditional apology and regret for the aforesaid observations/findings and prays that the said observations in the impugned order be expunged/deleted.
Patel Brothers & Co Vs State of Odisha (Orissa High Court) Admittedly, the Petitioner Assessee is a manufacturer of Bidis. The short question is whether it is included within the entry Tobacco and Tobacco products in item 16 of the Schedule under the Orissa Entry Tax Act (OET Act). Learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks […]
Abhishek Gumber, Proprietor of M/S AG Enterprises Vs Commissioner of GST (Delhi High Court) It is clear that once the petitioner‟s refund claim was rejected on the ground that it was founded on forged ITC, the petitioner would be liable to pay tax, interest and perhaps also penalty, in the event the adjudication order is […]
The Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 is in addition to other remedies available and not in derogation to The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Maharshi Steel Industries Vs Commissioner of Sales Tax (Orissa High Court) HC held that that the expression ‘tin containers’ is to be understood in the normal commercial and trade parlance and it would be erroneous for the Department to insist that only containers manufactured entirely out of tin should be considered to be tin containers. […]
Held that the restriction contained under Section 9(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 doesn’t apply once an application under Section 9(1) for interim measures has been entertained by the Court.
Held that as per Rule 2(b)(vii) of Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975 read with General Circular No. 15/2015, the share application money given by the Petitioner for allotment of shares cannot be treated as deposits. Hence, penal interest not available to the petitioner.
