The Delhi High Court held that ESOP expenditure cannot be disallowed merely because shares were allotted instead of purchased from third parties. It found no substantial question of law and dismissed the Revenue’s appeal.
An accused could not be kept in jail indefinitely in a money laundering case when the trial was unlikely to conclude within a reasonable time. The court granted bail to the accused, observing that he had already spent nearly five years in custody and that continued detention would be unjustified.
The Delhi High Court held that immunity under Section 270AA could not be denied when the penalty notice did not specify whether the proceedings were for under-reporting or misreporting of income. The impugned order was set aside.
The Delhi High Court held that the pre-deposit requirement introduced by the third proviso to Section 74(1) of the DVAT Act could not apply to returns filed before the amendment. The objections were directed to be heard without insisting on any pre-deposit.
The Delhi High Court held that an assessment order continues to exist even if an interim court order prevents it from being given effect to. It permitted the petitioner to file a fresh application under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024.
Delhi High Court ruled that the amendment restricting Explanation 2(e) applies prospectively and cannot take away vested refund rights relating to earlier tax periods. The Department was directed to decide the refund claims on merits.
The Delhi High Court held that Google could not use the registered trademark HINDWARE as advertising keywords and granted a permanent injunction. The Court also awarded ₹30 lakh in nominal damages and litigation costs.
The Delhi High Court ruled that the use of registered trademarks as keywords in Google Ads amounts to use under the Trade Marks Act. However, such use alone does not automatically establish infringement.
Assessing Officer acknowledged an inadvertent error in adding ₹46 lakh to the taxpayer’s income. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh assessment and directed consideration of all evidence, including the builder’s certificate.
The Delhi High Court held that import restrictions could not apply to consignments that had arrived before the relevant notification was published in the Official Gazette. The ruling reiterates that delegated legislation becomes enforceable only upon lawful publication.
