The Supreme Court admitted a PIL seeking nationwide prohibition of online gambling and betting and the application of strict regulatory measures. The Court requested assistance from the Revenue’s panel counsel before proceeding with directions on taxation, blocking, and data protection reliefs.
The Supreme Court dismissed the revenue’s appeal, affirming an SEZ Unit’s right to claim a refund of unutilised Input Tax Credit (ITC) under Rule 89 for exports made under LUT. The question of law regarding who can claim the refund remains open.
The Supreme Court upheld the disqualification of a councillor for suppressing her Section 138 NI Act conviction in her nomination affidavit. The Court ruled that concealment of criminal records violates voters’ right to informed choice and voids election results.
The Supreme Court set aside lower court decrees, holding that an unregistered “Palupatti” (family partition memo) is admissible for the collateral purpose of proving severance of joint family status and separate possession. This ruling confirms that a family arrangement, when corroborated by conduct and revenue records, validates the disruption of joint ownership.
The Supreme Court stayed an AP High Court judgment that set aside GST assessment orders and notices lacking the mandatory Document Identification Number (DIN).
The Supreme Court considered an inquiry report finding a UP police officer prima facie guilty of wilfully defying the court’s protective order against coercive measures.
SC held that private stage carriage operators cannot be granted permits on inter-State routes overlapping notified intra-State routes, reaffirming that State transport schemes under Chapter VI of Motor Vehicles Act override inter-State agreements.
Supreme Court ruled that High Court erred by dismissing Revenue’s appeal based only on old precedent without examining current facts. Judgment emphasizes that new AUDA tests must be applied to specific factual situation of Development Authority.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against the execution of a ₹1,087 crore arbitral award, ruling that a company’s allegation of fraud committed by its own officers (fraud on self) is not grounds to nullify a final award. The ruling restricts the scope of objections under Section 47 CPC to fraud vitiating the arbitral process itself, not internal corporate misconduct.
SC held that a cooperative bank was not employer of canteen workers engaged by a society within its premises. It laid down factors to determine employer–employee status, emphasising contractual and control analysis.
