Goods and Services Tax : Supreme Court upheld Section 69 GST arrest powers, requiring recorded reasons, CrPC safeguards, CBIC instructions and limiting arr...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court held excise duty paid by buyers formed part of turnover, discussed colourable devices, and distinguished legitim...
Corporate Law : A non-speaking dismissal of an SLP does not affirm the High Court's reasoning or constitute law under Article 141. The doctrine of...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court ruled that summoning hotel booking records and call detail records to prove adultery does not violate privacy, a...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court agreed to examine allegations that bank dues were settled at steep discounts through ARCs, while clarifying that...
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...
Corporate Law : SC set aside the PMLA cognizance order as the accused was not heard under the first proviso to Section 223(1) BNSS before cognizan...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court dismissed a miscellaneous application challenging its signed order, holding it not maintainable and imposing ₹2,00...
Income Tax : Supreme Court modified compensation by reassessing a self-employed deceased’s annual income after considering ITRs and business ...
Corporate Law : SC allowed the appeal and granted NDPS bail after holding that a case for bail was made out, subject to Trial Court conditions....
Corporate Law : SC held a Ministers statement binds the Government only if it reflects the Governments view and declined to issue speech guideline...
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 business of the erstwhile company will be continued to be carried by the amalgamated company; if the amalgamated company is deprived of the said benefit, it will frustrate the very purpose of amalgamation and defeat the order of amalgamation passed by the High Court exercising jurisdiction under the Companies Act.
The Challenge to the NCLT & NCALT: The five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India Justice KG Balakrishnan, Justice RV Raveendran, Justice DK Jain, Justice P Sathasivam and Justice JM Panchal has delivered its judgment on the legality of the constitution of National Company Law Tribunal and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal under the Companies Act, 1956 through Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002.
UOI vs. R. Gandhi (Supreme Court – 5 Judges). Parliament is competent to constitute Tribunals for special Acts. However, the failure to ensure independence of judiciary and separation of judicial and executive power renders the Company Law Tribunal unconstitutional. Suggestions given on how to remedy the defects.
In a landmark judgment, a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the legality of the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002, providing for the establishment of the National Company Law Tribunal and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal to deal exclusively with the company cases for their speedy disposal.
The five-judge Constitution Bench ruled that the National Company Law Tribunal can be set up only after amending the law. But, it did not decide on the fate of the National Tax Tribunal, another important body envisaged as a fast-track alternative disputes resolution mechanism.
A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court will deliver on Tuesday a much-awaited judgment on the formation of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). The decision is unanimous and it comes six years after the court admitted the appeal.
The assessee filed a Nil return after claiming depreciation. The AO disallowed depreciation but still assessed the total income at Rs. Nil. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was levied on the disallowance which was deleted by the Tribunal on the ground that as the returned income and the assessed income was Nil, penalty could not be levied. The department filed an appeal before the High Court which was dismissed on the basis that no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) could be levied where the returned and assessed income were Nil.
In what could be a severe blow to Anil Ambani group seeking cheap gas from elder brother Mukesh- led RIL, the Supreme Court on Friday ruled that government has the last word on pricing and utilisation of national asset.
Narco, polygraph and brain mapping tests can no more be conducted on anyone, either an accused or a suspect, without his/her consent, the Supreme Court said Wednesday in a ruling that was hailed by activists and lawyers. A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices R.V. Raveendran and J.M. Panchal said the forcible administration of these tests was “an unwarranted intrusion into the personal liberty” of those facing criminal offences.
These two civil appeals are filed by the Department against the order dated 2nd September, 2008, of the Gujarat High Court refusing to formulate, inter alia, the following question of law: “Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, in the facts and circumstances of this case, was right in confirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of
