M. C. Mehta Vs Union of India & Ors. (Supreme Court of India) There has been a request for removal of cap of 1,00,000 autos and we are informed that there is a recommendation made by the EPCA to that effect. The removal of the cap of the number fixed by this Court on 11.11.2011 […]
Bijnor Urban Cooperative Bank Limited Vs Meenal Agarwal (Supreme Court of India) The Apex court of the Nation ruled out in a recent judgement (Dec 15, 2021 reg matter of Bijnor Urban Cooperative Bank Limited) – that no court can direct a bank or a financial institution (FI) to offer one-time settlement (OTS) to a […]
E S Krishnamurthy & Ors. Vs Bharath Hi Tech Builders Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court) Conclusion: What the Adjudicating Authority and Appellate Authority had proceeded to do was to abdicate their jurisdiction to decide a petition under Section 7 by directing the respondent to settle the remaining claims within three months and leaving it open to […]
ITO Vs V. Mohan & Anr. (Supreme Court of India) SC explains service of Notice under section 8 of Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 We are of the considered opinion that Section 6(1) of the 1976 Act nowhere provides that it is “mandatory” to serve the convict or detenu with […]
N. Raghavender Vs State of Andhra Pradesh (Supreme Court) Section 409 IPC pertains to criminal breach of trust by a public servant or a banker, in respect of the property entrusted to him. The onus is on the prosecution to prove that the accused, a public servant or a banker was entrusted with the property […]
Beereddy Dasaratharami Reddy Vs V. Manjunath (Supreme Court of India) Right of the Karta to execute agreement to sell or sale deed of a joint Hindu family property is settled and is beyond cavil vide several judgments of this Court including Sri Narayan Bal and Others v. Sridhar Sutar and Others,2 wherein it has been […]
The daughters of the testator contested the said testament by filing a written statement. They averred that the will was fabricated and the signature of the testator in the said document was forged and the same was a got-up document by the plaintiff with the help of her husband’s friends who were the attesting witnesses of the will.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances when the petitioner was removed by the Bar Council under proviso to Section 26(1) of the Advocates Act and when the same is confirmed by the High Court it cannot be said that the High Court has committed any error.
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Union of India & Ors. v. Aap and Company [Civil Appeal No(s). 5978/2021 dated December 10, 2021] reversed the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, ruling that FORM GSTR-3B is not a return under Section 39 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Commissioner of GST And Central Excise Vs Citi Bank N.A. (Supreme Court of India) Issue- Whether Interchange fees received out of Merchant Discount Rate(MDR) by the issuing bank from accepting bank in relation to credit card transactions carried on a customer is liable to be taxed to service tax in the hands of the bank […]
