Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Conclusion: In present facts of the case, the Larger Bench of the Hon’ble High Court was referred an issue ‘mere failure to tick mark the applicable grounds’ in the notice issued under Section 271 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) vitiate the entire penalty […]
Dharmesh Gandhi Vs Assistant Commissioner (Anti-Evasion) (Bombay High Court) After hearing the matter at some length, we find that out of the nine bank accounts that have been attached by respondent No.1, only the accounts at Sr. Nos.2, 3 and 4 belong to the petitioner whereas the other accounts belong to the family members, namely, […]
Sanjay Soya Private Limited Vs Narayani Trading Company (Bombay High Court) Registration under the Copyright Act is optional and not compulsory. Registration is not necessary to claim a copyright. Registration under the Copyright Act merely raises a prima facie presumption in respect of the particulars entered in the Register of Copyright. The presumption is however […]
Atlantic Shipping Private Limited. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) High Court Held that DGFT Policy Circular Nos. 06/2018 dated 22.05.2018 and 08/2018 dated 21.06.2018 in so far as they seek to add and amend the provisions of the FTP 2015-20 by inserting additional conditions to curtail the rights / benefits claimed by the […]
Bhushan s/o Brijmohan Katta Vs State Of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court -Nagpur Bench) All that is alleged in the present case is that though the petitioner was on duty, he was not physically present in the NICU at the fateful moment. No material has been placed before us that whenever an injection has to be […]
Eureka Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Bombay High Court ) FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT Heard Mr. Prasannan Namboodiri, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Pradeep Jetly, learned senior counsel for the respondents. 2. This order shall dispose of both the writ petitions as facts are […]
Morde Foods Pvt. Ltd. & another Vs Union of India & Others (Bombay High Court) The question is that if the declarant had filed an appeal before the appellate forum and such appeal was finally heard on or before 30th day of June, 2019; whether the declarant would be eligible to make a declaration under […]
When the law requires that no application for refund shall be rejected without giving an applicant an opportunity of being heard, the same cannot be substituted by telephonic conversations and exchange of e-mails.
The objective of the MEIS scheme is to provide rewards to exporters to offest infrastructural inefficiencies and associated costs. In other words, the objective of Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) is to promote manufacture and export of notified goods / products to notified markets and once this is done, such exporter is required to be rewarded by duty credit scrips which can be utilized by the exporter.
At the heart of this dispute is the 1st and 2nd Defendants’ utterly illicit use of a still image of the Plaintiff in their 2020 Telugu film entitled ‘dV’. It was released on 5th September 2020 and has been available on Amazon Prime, operated by Defendant No. 3, since then.
