Taking note of the exposition of law on the subject, it is well-settled that mens rea or actus reus is not an essential element for imposing penalty or damages for breach of civil obligations and liabilities.
Held that the position that would emerge is that when a company is the payee of the cheque based on which a complaint is filed under Section 138 of N.I. Act, the complainant necessarily should be the Company which would be represented by an employee who is authorized.
Yashi Constructions Vs Union of India (Supreme Court of India) It is an admitted fact that the petitioner did not deposit the amount under the Sabka Vishwas – (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS) within the time limit provided under the Scheme, i.e., within 30 days. In that view of the matter, the High Court […]
Date on which the Resolution Plan was approved by the learned NCLT, all claims stood frozen, and no claim, which is not a part of the Resolution Plan, would survive.
Parthasarathy Vs E Springs Avenues Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court) Supreme Court held High Court has no jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to remand the matter to the same Arbitrator unless it is consented by both the parties that the matter be remanded to the same Arbitrator. FULL TEXT OF […]
Authority For Clarification and Advance Ruling Vs Aakavi Spinning Mills (P) Ltd (Supreme Court) As noticed, the Entry in question, as inserted into the Fourth Schedule to the Act, is clear and specific that is, Hank Yarn; it carries neither any ambiguity nor any confusion. Undoubtably, the yarn in the hank form (which is a […]
Vodafone Idea Cellular Ltd. vs Ajay Kumar Agarwal (Supreme Court of India) HELD THAT : It would be open to a consumer to opt for the remedy of arbitration , but there is no compulsion in law to do so and it would be open to a consumer to seek recourse to the remedies which […]
Adiraj Manpower Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise (Supreme Court) The appellant has sought the benefit of Notification No. 25/2012-Service Tax dated 20 June 2012. Under the terms of the notification, the Central Government exempted certain taxable services from the whole of the service tax leviable under Section 66(B) of the Finance Act […]
Punjab National Bank Vs Union of India & Ors. (Supreme Court of India) Evidently, prior to insertion of Section 11E in the Central Excise Act, 1944 w.e.f. 08.04.2011, there was no provision in the Act of 1944 inter alia, providing for First Charge on the property of the Assessee or any person under the Act […]
It could thus be seen, that when a person avails a service for a commercial purpose, to come within the meaning of ‘consumer’ as defined in the said Act, he will have to establish that the services were availed exclusively for the purposes of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment. There cannot be any straitjacket formula and such a question will have to be decided in the facts of each case, depending upon the evidence placed on record.
