Goods and Services Tax : The Finance Act, 2025 retrospectively amended Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act after the Supreme Court allowed ITC on certain comm...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court held that liabilities arising from corporate guarantees qualify as financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Inso...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court ruled that a shortfall payment clause in a Deed of Hypothecation can qualify as a contract of guarantee under th...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court expressed serious reservations about earlier rulings denying bail in UAPA cases, holding that smaller benches ca...
Income Tax : The article explains the Supreme Court’s landmark 2024 ruling that broken period interest on debt securities is capital in natur...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court upheld joint insolvency proceedings against two interconnected real estate companies due to common management an...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court ruled that CoC and RP can surrender financially burdensome assets voluntarily, clarifying moratorium under section 1...
Corporate Law : SC clarifies limits of High Court's writ powers in IBC cases and recognises Indian CIRP as foreign main proceeding in cross-border...
Corporate Law : Justice BR Gavai sworn in as India's 52nd Chief Justice. Focus areas include addressing case pendency and improving court infrastr...
Corporate Law : Key IBC case law updates from Oct-Dec 2024, covering Supreme Court and High Court decisions on CoC powers, resolution plans, relat...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court stayed further proceedings arising from a Section 74 GST order while examining whether writ petitions can be ent...
Finance : The Supreme Court refused relief to borrowers who defaulted from the very first instalment after availing an ₹8.09 crore loan. T...
Finance : The Supreme Court upheld a Will executed in favour of the testator’s sister despite objections from his wife and children. The C...
Income Tax : SC examined nature of amounts received from an AOP and upheld findings that receipts constituted profit share rather than revenue ...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court dismissed the challenge to a Delhi High Court ruling that quashed reassessment proceedings under Sections 148A(d...
Corporate Law : The Bill seeks to amend Articles 15 and 16 to allow reservation for backward classes proportionate to their population identified ...
Fema / RBI : RBI directs banks, NBFCs, and other entities to implement Supreme Court’s accessibility guidelines for digital KYC, ensuring inc...
Income Tax : CBDT raises monetary limits for tax appeals: Rs. 60 lakh for ITAT, Rs. 2 crore for High Court, and Rs. 5 crore for Supreme Court, ...
Corporate Law : No restrictions on joint bank accounts or nominations for the queer community, as clarified by the Supreme Court and RBI in August...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court of India introduces new procedures for case adjournments effective 14th February 2024, detailing strict guidelines a...
The Supreme Court today said that Khap panchayats’ diktat on dress code for women and asking them not to carry mobile is unlawful.A bench of justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana Prakash Desai said such diktats are against the fundamental right to life and asked Khap Panchayats (caste-based councils) to file their replies on the issue.
Notice gives jurisdiction to ITO – Issuance of notice within period of limitation gives jurisdiction to Assessing Officer to proceed to make reassessment.
In one view of the matter there was, in the circumstances of this case, an implied agreement under which the cheques were accepted unconditionally as payment and on another view, even if the cheques were taken conditionally, the cheques not having been dishonoured but having been cashed, the payment related back to the dates of the receipt of the cheques and in law the dates of payments were the dates of the delivery of the cheques.
The short question that falls for determination in these appeals by special leave is whether the appellant-company was, in the facts and circumstances of the case, offering any ‘service’ to the respondents within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 so as to make it amenable to the jurisdiction of the fora established under the said Act.
SC held that The appellants shall immediately hand over the Demand Drafts, which they have produced in Court, to SEBI, for a total sum of Rs. 5120/- Crores and deposit the balance in terms of the order of 31st August, 2012, namely, Rs. 17,400/- Crores and the entire amount, including the amount mentioned above, together with interest at the rate of 15 per cent, per annum,
If the authorities are of the opinion that the goods ought not to be released pending the appeal, the straight-forward course for them is to obtain an order of stay or other appropriate direction from the Tribunal or the Supreme Court, as the case may be. Without obtaining such an order they cannot refuse to implement the order under appeal. As is well-known, mere filing of an appeal does not operate as a stay or suspension of the order appealed against.
The High Court had failed to notice that in view of the express provisions of the Act an assessee was entitled to compensation by way of interest on the delay in the payment of amounts lawfully due to the assessee which were withheld wrongly and contrary to the law by the department for an inordinate long period of up to 17 years.
In the instant case effect of the issue of right shares vis-a-vis original shares had not been fully kept in proper perspective by the Tribunal in its evaluation. Further the assessee was the chairman of the company and in fact that if he did not participate in buying right shares, that would have adverse effect on the value of the shares of the company
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Commissioner of Income-tax versus Associated Industrial Development Co. (P.) Ltd. K.S. HEGDE AND A.N. GROVER, JJ. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1929 OF1968 SEPTEMBER 7, 1971 JUDGMENT Grover, J. —This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Calcutta High Court in an income-tax reference. The assessee is a private […]
In Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. (supra) a view has been taken that modvat credit can be taken on LSHS used in the manufacture of fertilizer exempt from duty. Although this decision was rendered in the context of availing modvat credit under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 as they existed prior to the promulgation of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 the principle of law laid down is general and not specific to the Central Excise Rules, 1944.
