National Spot Exchange Limited Vs Anil Kohli (Supreme Court of India) Conclusion: NCLAT had rightly refused to condone the delay of 44 days in preferring the appeal against the order passed by the NCLT and rejected the claim of the appellant as the period of 15 days which maximum could have been condoned in view […]
Union of India & Ors. Vs VKC Footsteps India Pvt Ltd. (Supreme Court) The Apex Court Sets aside the order of Gujarat HC and upheld the order of Madras HC. Although the Hon’ble Court has noted some anomalies and suggested the GST Council to look into the same. Background: (Gujarat High Court) The Division Bench […]
SC issues notice in Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs ACIT case, petitioner contests non-suiting by relying on contrary views of other High Courts.
Ebix Singapore Private Limited Vs Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited & Anr. (Supreme Court of India) This Court is cognizant that the extraordinary circumstance of the COVID-19 pandemic would have had a significant impact on the businesses of Corporate Debtors and upon successful Resolution Applicants whose Plans may not have been sanctioned by […]
South Indian Bank Ltd Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Supreme Court of India) 1. For purposes of 14A, a presumption can be made that investments have been made out of interest free funds even when there are mixed funds and there is no bifurcation in books of accounts for interest expense. 2. It needs to […]
Bhupendra Ramdhan Pawar Vs Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (Supreme Court of India) 1. If the land value had been determined with reference to the sale statistics or compensation awarded for a nearby vacant land, then necessarily, the trees will have to be valued separately. 2. But if the value of the land has been determined […]
However, it clarified that the moratorium was only in relation to the Corporate Debtor (as highlighted above) and not in respect of the directors/management of the Corporate Debtor,
Namrata Verma Vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors (Supreme Court) Heard Mr. Parvez Bashista, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State of U.P. It is not for the employee to insist to transfer him/her and/or not to transfer him/her at a particular place. It […]
Observed that the term Royalty has always been construed to be a compensation paid for rights and privileges paid to the grantee. In the current case, the charges paid for use of controlled release of water were for the privileges enjoyed by the Appellant and for such a privilege, the charges and royalty are perfectly justified.
Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and Others Vs Commercial Steel Limited (Supreme Court) In this case respondent had a statutory remedy under section 107. Instead of availing of the remedy, the respondent instituted a petition under Article 226. The existence of an alternate remedy is not an absolute bar to the maintainability of a writ […]
