The Supreme Court refused relief to borrowers who defaulted from the very first instalment after availing an ₹8.09 crore loan. The Court held that an offer to repay only the principal amount after six years was too little too late.
The Supreme Court upheld a Will executed in favour of the testator’s sister despite objections from his wife and children. The Court ruled that exclusion of natural heirs alone is not a suspicious circumstance when the Will is properly proved.
SC examined nature of amounts received from an AOP and upheld findings that receipts constituted profit share rather than revenue share. Court noted that such income could not be taxed again in member’s hands.
The Supreme Court dismissed the challenge to a Delhi High Court ruling that quashed reassessment proceedings under Sections 148A(d) and 148. The courts held that reassessment cannot be sustained on allegations that change after issuance of the original notice.
The Supreme Court held that interest paid on borrowed funds was deductible under Section 36(1)(iii) because the loan was used for business purposes. The Court ruled that commercial expediency and composite business operations justified the deduction claim.
The Supreme Court held that liabilities arising from corporate guarantees qualify as financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Consortium lenders were therefore entitled to Financial Creditor status and inclusion in the Committee of Creditors.
The Chhattisgarh High Court held that TCS under Section 206C(1C) cannot be collected on compounding fees recovered from illegal miners. The Court ruled that the provision applies only to lawful lease holders, licence holders, or contractual mining rights holders.
Supreme Court considered whether sales of natural gas transported from Andhra Pradesh to Uttar Pradesh constituted inter-State sales or intra-State transactions liable to VAT. The dispute arose after Uttar Pradesh treated the sale as completed within the State because gas became ascertainable only at buyers’ factories.
The Supreme Court held that grants disbursed by a statutory corporation formed part of its core business functions and qualified as deductible revenue expenditure. The ruling clarified that such grants were not mere application of income.
The Supreme Court restored execution proceedings after finding that the decree already contained directions for sale of the property if partition by metes and bounds was impossible. The Court ruled that further final decree proceedings were unnecessary in the facts of the case.
