The Supreme Court of India held that parties cannot enforce rights in execution after abandoning earlier suits on the same issue. The key takeaway is that non-prosecution of prior claims can bar relief even if res judicata does not apply.
The absence of a signature on the charge-framing order sheet was a curable procedural defect and did not vitiate the trial, particularly where the accused was duly informed of and understood the charges against them.
The Court held that increased financial liability cannot override the right to just compensation. It refused to revisit earlier rulings granting solatium and interest.
If a Scheduled caste person converted to any other religion other than Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism, he immediately loses the membership of the Scheduled Caste status. In this, the Court also explained that if such a person re-converted to Hinduism, Sikhism or Buddhism, then he had to establish conclusive proof of the following, to re-claim SC status.
Excise exemption notifications based on use or intended use should be interpreted liberally in favour of the assessee as once the goods were used for the intended purposethe fact that a portion was incidentally used for other activities did not disentitle assessee from claiming the exemption.
The court held that issues conclusively decided by multiple courts cannot be reopened by subordinate authorities. It declared such attempts as abuse of process and upheld finality of judgments.
The Supreme Court held that ambiguity in exemption notifications cannot benefit taxpayers. It ruled that such ambiguity must be resolved in favour of the Revenue, reinforcing strict interpretation principles.
The Court held that a miscellaneous application cannot be used to reopen a dismissed SLP unless it falls within limited exceptions like clerical errors or executory issues. It emphasized finality of judicial orders and dismissed the recall plea as not maintainable.
CIT & Anr. Vs MPHASIS Limited (Supreme Court of India) The Supreme Court of India dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the Revenue on the ground of an unexplained delay of 600 days. The Court noted that no satisfactory explanation had been provided to justify condonation of such delay and, accordingly, dismissed the […]
The issue involved inability to access documents leading to ex parte assessment. The Court granted interim relief by reducing the pre-deposit amount. The takeaway is that procedural fairness can influence deposit requirements.
