Internet And Mobile Association of India Vs RBI (Supreme Court of India) We cannot lose sight of three important aspects namely, (i) that RBI has not so far found, in the past 5 years or more, the activities of VC exchanges to have actually impacted adversely, the way the entities regulated by RBI function (ii) […]
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Universal Ferro & Allied Chemicals Ltd. (Supreme Court of India) Conclusion: Since in the transaction between the UFAC and TISCO, there was no transfer of property in goods to the UFAC and, as such, it could not be considered to be a sale under section 4 of the Sale of […]
Whether Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act 2010 (FCRA, 2010) (read with rules) allows Central Government to freely decide whether an organisation is political or not? What is Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act 2010? The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act 2010 and rules framed under it (the ‘FCRA’ or ‘Act’) regulate contribution by non-governmental organisations (‘NGO’) in India. The […]
Since the reference to Hong Kong as ‘place of arbitration’ was not a simple reference as the ‘venue’ for the arbitral proceedings; but a reference to Hong Kong was for final resolution by arbitration administered in Hong Kong
Union of India & Ors. Vs. Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court) In the case of Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors., Punjab & Haryana High Court) has directed the Government to permit the Petitioners to file or revise where already filed incorrect TRAN-1 either electronically or manually statutory Form(s) TRAN-1 […]
The issue under consideration is whether the High Court was right in directing that pre-deposit was not required for entertaining an appeal before the DRAT as mandated by Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short SARFAESI Act).
Supreme Court judgment on avoidance of transactions under Insolvency Code. Key rulings on sections 43, 45, and 66. Anuj Jain vs Axis Bank. Legal insights.
In the given case, a batch of writ petitions are pending before the High Courts of Delhi, Bombay and Punjab and Haryana in which the constitutional validity of Section 171 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 read with Rule 126 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules 2017 and other cognate provisions, is under challenge.
Kishore Jagjivandas Tanna Vs Joint Director of Income Tax (Inv.) & Anr (Supreme Court) In the facts of the present case, the respondents do not and cannot dispute that they have to refund the seized amount. Further, considerable delay and failure to make the payment constitutes and is inseparable from the cause of action as […]
SC has upheld addition under Section of Share Capital and Share premium Considering the Same as Bogus as Appellant was failed to prove the genuineness of the transaction of receiving share application money and to prove the creditworthiness.
