We are not inclined to entertain the petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution in the first instance before this Court. The petitioners have an alternate and efficacious remedy of moving the concerned High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution.
It is one thing to say that Section 45 of the PMLA Act to offences under the ordinary law would not get attracted but once the prayer for anticipatory bail is made in connection with offence under the PMLA Act, the underlying principles and rigors of Section 45 of the PMLA Act must get triggered — although the application is under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
Kerala State Beverages Manufacturing & Marketing Corporation Ltd. Vs ACIT (Supreme Court of India) So far as surcharge on sales tax is concerned, the High Court has held in favour of KSBC and against the revenue. The reasoning of the High Court is that surcharge on sales tax is a tax and Section 40(a) (iib) does not contemplate ‘tax’ and surcharge […]
Small Industries Development Bank Of India Vs. SIBCO Investment Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court) RBI has wide supervisory powers over financial institutions like SIDBI, in furtherance of which, any direction issued by the RBI, deriving power from the RBI Act or the Banking Regulation Act is statutorily binding on the defendant. Admittedly, the RBI issued Notification […]
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Vs Dilip Uttam Jayabhay (Supreme Court of India) Therefore, the short question which is posed for the consideration of this Court is whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the punishment of dismissal can be said to be an unfair labour practice on the ground that the same […]
Employees who have refused the offer of regular promotion were disentitled to the financial upgradation benefits envisaged under the O.M. dated 9.8.1999. However, the above rule would not apply to employees who were not offered regular promotion but conditional promotion on officiating basis and subject to reversion.
Explore Amit Sahni’s challenge to Income Tax Act Section 194A(3)(ixa) at the Supreme Court of India. Details on the dismissal and legal considerations.
The claim of assessee stood at Rs. 96,41,765.31 for not making the due payments against the 189 consignment of the respondents was acceptable as the respondent had taken up wholly untenable ground that the large number of documents such as invoices, debit notes and ST-1 Form spread over 3 months was an exercise of duress to defeat the legitimate claim raised by assessee.
At this stage, suffice for us to say that while referring to category ‘C’, inadvertently, Section 45 of Prevention of Money laundering Act (PMLA) has been mentioned which has been struck down by this Court. Learned ASG states that an amendment was made and that is pending challenge before this Court before a different Bench. That would be a matter to be considered by that Bench.
Supreme Court ruling on admission of money with onus to prove full settlement. Section 70, Indian Contract Act, discussed. Appellant entitled to decree.
