Access significant and up-to-date high court judgments for legal insights and precedent. Stay informed about the latest legal decisions and their impact on various areas of law.
Corporate Law : Allahabad HC asserts that Section 498A IPC is often misused against entire families to exert pressure. Employment prospects should...
Corporate Law : The Orissa High Court ruled that voter ID alone is not reliable for determining age in insurance claims, directing LIC to reassess...
Corporate Law : Delhi High Court recent judgment highlights the alarming misuse of the POCSO Act, where cases are filed due to family objections t...
Corporate Law : J&K&L High Court quashes money laundering case against Farooq Abdullah, citing absence of a scheduled offence under the Prevention...
Corporate Law : Jharkhand HC directs the state to use its Special Branch to identify illegal immigrants allegedly from Bangladesh in six districts...
Corporate Law : SC rules on Special Court jurisdiction; NCLAT redefines financial debt; HC upholds IBBI regulations and addresses various insolven...
Goods and Services Tax : HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA: Ramesh Kumar Patodia v. Citi Bank [WPO NO. 547 OF 2019 JUNE 24, 2022 ] Facts: ♦ Petitioner is a holder ...
Goods and Services Tax : CGST, Gurugram (Anti Evasion) Vs Gaurav Dhir (Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Courts, Gurugram) U/s 132(1)) r/w 132(1)(b)(C)(e...
Corporate Law : In order to dispense with the physical signatures on the daily orders (which are not important/final orders and judgments) of the ...
Custom Duty : Delhi High Court admits petition questioning Validity of provisions in Finance Act 2022 which overruled landmark Judgment of Supr...
Corporate Law : Bombay HC upholds priority of Janaseva Sahakari Bank's secured interest over Sales Tax Dept’s claims, setting aside the mutation...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court quashes reassessment notices for AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15, citing procedural lapses and lack of valid grounds unde...
Company Law : Delhi High Court held that timelines under Regulation 35A of the CIRP Regulations, 2016 for filing avoidance application are direc...
Income Tax : Delhi HC held that the settlement consideration as received was liable to be recognized as capital gains and the same couldn’t p...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court held that passing of order by the revenue under section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act on the basis of fresh groun...
Corporate Law : The Delhi High Court mandates new video conferencing protocols to enhance transparency and accessibility in court proceedings. Rea...
Income Tax : Income Tax Department Issues Instructions for Assessing Officers after Adverse Observations of Hon. Allahabad High Court in in Civ...
Corporate Law : Delhi High Court has exempted the Lawyers from wearing Gowns practicing in the High Court with effect from March 2, 2022 till furt...
Corporate Law : Till further orders, all documents/ not summons/Daks through physical mode be dispensed with, except where there, is a specific or...
Income Tax : Hon’ble Judges to hear the matters physically at the Principal Seat at Bombay, on experimental basis with effect from 1st Decemb...
Held that ex parte order of ad interim injunction granted before notice to opposite party under the proviso to Rule 3 of Order XXXIX C.P.C.. cannot be treated at part with other ex parte orders/decree.
Held that ad-interim injunction provided from the use of TATA in website tatabonus.com; crypto products by the name of $TATA or any other product being sold on the website www.hakunamatata.finance.
Purabdhani Enterprise Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) In this case two show cause notice were issued for cancellation of GST Registration. While the earlier show cause notice dated 9.11.2021 seeking cancellation of registration was based on the ground that firm of the petitioner was non-existent and that business was not being run, the […]
Deputy Director of Income Tax (INV) Vs Xiongwei Li (Delhi High Court) The proforma for issuance of the Look Out Circular indicates the nationality of the respondent to be that of China. As per the communication dated 19.2.2022 apart from the aspect of M/s Huawei Telecommunications (India) Company Private Limited (HTICPL) and M/s Huawei Technologies […]
Demand notice issued by the tax authorities to a Senior Advocate seeking payment of service tax on legal services provided by him to a legal firm was set aside as Notification No.30/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 had been amended by way of substitution by virtue of two consecutive notifications, i.e., Notification No. 18/2016-ST dated 01.03.2016 and Notification No.34/2016-ST dated 06.06.2016
N D Timbers Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) The core question of law which falls for consideration by this Court is whether the levy of five time fees in the form of penalty upon the petitioners on import of timber after granting them relaxation for such import will violate the provisions of Article […]
All questions relating to novation of the MOU with the execution of the Supplemental Agreement and the significance of reference to the terms of the MOU in Clause-13 of the Supplemental Agreement, which touch upon the jurisdiction of the sole Arbitrator to enter reference of the dispute, must be decided by the sole Arbitrator as required under Section 16 of the Arbitration Act.
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble High Court observed that Payment Aggregators would fall under Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 as Payment Aggregator ensures that the money is transferred to the designated nodal account, and after a gap of a stipulated timeframe, which the petitioners say is three days, a settlement takes place and funds are transmitted to the merchant’s account.
Create Consults Vs State of Madhya Pradesh (Madhya Pradesh High Court) While generating the e-way bill, on account of a bonofide error, instead of detail of AVGOL India Pvt. Ltd. (Supplier), petitioner mentioned its own details. Meaning thereby the petitioner made attempt to demonstrate that the e-way bill which was generated by petitioner, should have […]
High Court held that reasons provided to the petitioner did not contain any information but it is titled as ‘cash related information detail’ and such information cannot be said to be sufficient for reopening of the assessment.
