Supreme Court of India

Recommendations of GST Council not binding on Union & States: SC

Union of India Vs Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)

SC held that recommendations of the GST Council are not binding on the Union and States. It held that Recommendations of the GST Council to only have a persuasive value, particularly when interpreted along with the objective of the GST regime to foster cooperative federalism and harmony between the constituent units;...

Read More

Service Tax on secondment Services of employees of Overseas group company

C.C.,C.E. & S.T.-Bangalore Vs  Northern Operating Systems Pvt Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)

C.C.,C.E. & S.T.-Bangalore Vs Northern Operating Systems Pvt Ltd. (Supreme Court) A co-joint reading of the documents on record show show that the assessee had operational or functional control over the seconded employees; it was potentially liable for the performance of the tasks assigned to them. That it paid (through reimbursement)...

Read More

Only Clerical or Arithmetical Mistakes in Order Fixing Minimum Wages can be Corrected U/s. 10 of Minimum Wages Act, 1948: SC

Gomantak Mazdoor Sangh Vs State of Goa (Supreme Court of India)

Gomantak Mazdoor Sangh Vs. State of Goa (Supreme Court) What can be said to be an arithmetical or clerical error has been dealt with and considered by this Court in the case of Master Construction Co. (P) Ltd. (supra). It is observed and held that an arithmetical mistake is a mistake of calculation; a clerical […]...

Read More

SC explains applicability of Duomatic Principle in Company Law In India

Mahima Datla Vs Dr. Renuka Datla (Supreme Court of India)

Duomatic Principle can be briefly stated as 'anything the members of a company can do by formal resolution in a general meeting, they can also do informally, if all of them assent to it....

Read More

SC refers Doctrine of Group of Companies to Larger Bench for relook

Cox And Kings Limited Vs Sap India Private Limited (Supreme Court of India)

Cox And Kings Limited Vs Sap India Private Limited (Supreme Court of India) Supreme Court referred following aspects of application of doctrine of ‘Group of Companies’, which is mostly utilised to bind non-signatories to an Arbitration Agreement, to a larger Bench for relook- A. Whether the Group of Companies Doctrine sh...

Read More

Scuttling of criminal process at pre-trial stag not merited: SC

Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (Supreme Court of India)

Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (Supreme Court) The issue to be answered here is whether summons and trial notice should have been quashed on the basis of factual defences. The corollary therefrom is what should be the responsibility of the quashing Court and whether it must weigh the evidence presented [&hellip...

Read More

SC Quashes Prosecution under PMLA after considering Income Tax Dept & CBI report

J. Sekar @Sekar Reddy Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Supreme Court of India)

J. Sekar @ Sekar Reddy Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Supreme Court of India) It is most relevant to note that CBI after investigation in the main case in RC MA1 2016 A0040 submitted the closure report before the Additional Sessions Judge, CBI Court, Chennai in exercise of power under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. The said report […]...

Read More

Excess Payment to Employee due to Erroneous Interpretation of Rule Not Recoverable : Supreme Court

Thomas Daniel Vs State of Kerala (Supreme Court of India)

Thomas Daniel Vs State of Kerala (Supreme Court of India) This Court in a catena of decisions has consistently held that if the excess amount was not paid on account of any misrepresentation or fraud of the employee or if such excess payment was made by the employer by applying a wrong principle for calculating the […]...

Read More

Prosecution of Partners/Directors without arraigning firm/company as accused for dishonour of cheque not maintainable u/s 138 of NI Act: SC

Dilip Hariramani Vs Bank of Baroda (Supreme Court of India)

Dilip Hariramani Vs Bank of Baroda (Supreme Court of India) It is common knowledge that complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for dishonour of cheques are usually made against the directors of the company or the partners of the partnership firm and the company or the partnership firm are not arraigned [&helli...

Read More

CBDT grace marks policy not applies to person who passed in his own category: SC

Union of India Vs Mukesh Kumar Meena (Supreme Court of India)

Union of India Vs Mukesh Kumar Meena (Supreme Court) it is observed that the CBDT introduced the grace marks policy with the purpose of enabling the marginally failing candidates to pass in the examination. Once the respondent – original applicant passed in his own category, there was no question of allowing/granting him any further gra...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,055)
Company Law (8,328)
Corporate Law (10,028)
Custom Duty (9,229)
DGFT (4,795)
Excise Duty (4,718)
Fema / RBI (5,183)
Finance (5,582)
Income Tax (41,340)
SEBI (4,471)
Service Tax (3,965)

Search Posts by Date

June 2022
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930