VVF (India) Limited Vs The State of Maharashtra (Supreme Court of India) While analyzing the rival submissions, it is necessary to note, at the outset, that, under the provisions of Section 26(6A), the aggregate of the amounts stipulated in the sub-clauses of the provision has to be deposited and proof of payment is required to […]
While considering the application u/s 254(2) of the Act, the Appellate Tribunal is not required to re-visit its earlier order and to go into detail on merits. The powers under Section 254(2) of the Act are only to rectify/correct any mistake apparent from the record.
SC issued directives for the adoption of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for Tribunals. Further, directed the extension of Legal Information Management & Briefing System (LIMBS) with the IT Systems to CESTAT, ITAT and other Tribunals.
TATA Consultancy Services Limited Vs Vishal Ghisulal Jain (Supreme Court) Facts- The appellant and the Corporate Debtor entered into a Build Phase Agreement followed by a Facilities Agreement. The Facilities Agreement obligated the Corporate Debtor to provide premises with certain specifications and facilities to the appellant for conducting examinations for educational institutions. Later, a termination […]
Kewal Krishan Vs Rajesh Kumar And Ors. Etc. (Supreme Court) Payment of price is an essential part of a sale, thus sale deed executed without payment of price is void: Supreme Court In Kewal Krishan v. Rajesh Kumar & Ors. Etc. [Civil Appeal Nos. 6989-6992 of 2021 arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 2033-2036 of […]
Veena Pandey Vs Union of India (Supreme Court of India) Pension as is well known, is the deferred portion of the compensation1 for rendering long years of service. It is a hard-earned benefit accruing to an employee and has been held to be in the nature of property by this Court, in State of Jharkhand […]
The statutory provision – Rule 2(1) defining ‘Input Service’ post 01.04.2011 is very clear and the out-door catering services when such services are used primarily for personal use or consumption of any employee is held to be excluded from the definition of ‘Input Service’.
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Private Ltd. vs. Union of India (Supreme Court) We have perused the report dated 21.10.2021 submitted by Mr. Jayant K. Sud, learned Additional Solicitor General in compliance of our order dated 03.08.2021 and he has made certain suggestions. He has also sought directions from this Court. We consider it appropriate […]
Rajinder Kumar Vs Central Board of Direct Tax & Anr. (Supreme Court of India) The Court is convened through Video Conferencing. Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the petitioner – C.B.D.T. in T.P. (Civil) Nos. 18651866/2021 after arguing for some time, seeks permission to withdraw the Transfer Petitions. In view of the request made, the […]
Nandlal Lohariya Vs Jagdish Chand Purohit and others (Supreme Court) It is common knowledge that professionals are also sometimes negligent in their service just like businessman or other service providers. The Consumer Protection Act provides redressal to all consumers for deficiency in service by the Service Providers. Builders, Hospitals, Airlines, Railways, Doctors, Businesses all are […]
