Corporate Law : Supreme Court restores citizenship of Muslim man after 12 years, ruling it a 'grave miscarriage of justice' due to lack of evidenc...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court mandates that bail orders must furnish reasons, presuming non-application of mind otherwise, emphasizing judicia...
Corporate Law : Learn about the Supreme Courts landmark judgment allowing Muslim women divorced via triple talaq to claim maintenance under Sectio...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court rules that bail conditions cant mandate police to track accused's movements, upholding the right to privacy under Ar...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court has issued guidelines to ensure respectful and accurate portrayal of persons with disabilities in visual media, prom...
Excise Duty : Case Title: M/s. Marwadi Shares and Finance Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors.; Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 27124/2023; Dat...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore Supreme Court's scrutiny of whether supplying cranes for services like loading, unloading, lifting, and shifting qualifies...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore the case of Pradeep Kanthed v. Union of India where the Supreme Court issues notice to the Finance Ministry regarding the ...
Goods and Services Tax : > The dismissal of Department’s SLP against order of Hon’ble Calcutta Hight Court by the Hon’ble Supreme Cour...
Corporate Law : Explore the Collegium's recommendations for filling vacancies in the Supreme Court of India. Learn about the selection criteria an...
Goods and Services Tax : Supreme Court verdict on Maruti Wire INDS. Pvt. Ltd. vs S.T.O. examines penal interest under Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. L...
Custom Duty : Supreme Court's judgment in Pratibha Processors vs Union of India clarifies the interpretation of Section 61(2) of the Customs Act...
Income Tax : Understand the Supreme Court ruling on whether interest paid under the U.P. Sugarcane Cess Act, 1956 qualifies as a deduction unde...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court of India dismissed review petitions challenging the 2018 judgment on the Aadhaar Act being classified as a 'Mone...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court's verdict on whether a company's purchase of a car for a director's personal use falls under 'commercial purpose' as...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court of India introduces new procedures for case adjournments effective 14th February 2024, detailing strict guidelines a...
Corporate Law : Explore the updated FAQs on the implementation of the EPFO judgment dated 04.11.2022. Understand proof requirements, pension compu...
Income Tax : Comprehensive guide on CBDT's directives for AOs concerning the Abhisar Buildwell Supreme Court verdict. Dive into its implication...
Income Tax : Supreme Court's circular outlines guidelines for filing written submissions, documents, and oral arguments before Constitution Ben...
Corporate Law : The establishment M/s Radhika Theatre, situated at Warangal, Telangana was covered under ESI Act w.e.f. 16.01.1981 on the basis of...
CASE-1 Applicant’s Name: Khera Trading Company Citation: Advance Ruling No. HAR/HAAAR/2018-19/06 The Haryana Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) bench held that 18% Goods and Service Tax (GST) is payable on pizza topping as pizza topping is not pizza. BRIEF FACTS: 1. The appellant is in the business of distributing various dairy and non-dairy products […]
A negotiable instrument is a piece of paper that entitles a person to pay a sum of money that is transferable from one person to another by endorsement and delivery. The main objective before introducing the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 is to legalize the system under which these instruments can deliver from one person to another the same as that of ordinary goods.
Haryana Urban Development Vs Mehta Construction Company (Supreme Court of India) Sub-section (2)(a) to Section 34 of the Act inserted with effect from 23rd October 2015 states that the arbitral award may be set aside by the court if the court finds the award is vitiated by patent illegality appearing on the face of the […]
National Faceless Assessment Centre Vs Mantra Industries Limited (Supreme Court of India) Mr. Balbir Singh, learned ASG, has vehemently submitted that, against the assessment order, the High Court ought not to have entertained the Writ Petition and ought to have relegated the original writ petitioner to avail statutory remedy of appeal before the CIT(A). It […]
Ganesh Ores Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Odisha & Ors. (Supreme Court of India) The petitioner had filed a refund claim, which was granted by the authorities. Subsequently, a notice was issued to the petitioner for recovery of the refund granted erroneously. The petitioner submitted that the revenue authorities should have filed an appeal […]
Noel Harper & Ors Vs Union of India (Supreme Court of India) Sub-Whether amendment made to Section 7, 12(1A),12A and 17(1) of Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 are manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable and imprinting upon the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. SC declare that the amended […]
Apex Court, in the case of Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited vs. Hitro Energy Solutions Private Limited, was seized of the following legal questions: 1. Whether the Appellant is an Operational Creditor under the Code even though it was a ‘purchaser’; 2. Whether the Respondent took over the debt from the Proprietary Concern; and 3. Whether the application under Section 9 of the Code is barred by limitation.
SC held that once the resolution plan was approved, all claims stood frozen and a claim which did not form a part of the final resolution plan would not be legally actionable.
Man Singh Vs The State of Uttar Pradesh (Supreme Court of India) Supreme Court held that the High Court has failed to consider the fact that even if the appointment was irregular, the appellant had discharged the duties and in lieu of duties, he had to be paid. The State cannot take any work from […]
Court notes and holds that whether corporate death of an entity upon amalgamation per se invalidates an assessment order ordinarily cannot be determined on a bare application of Section 481 of the Companies Act, 1956 (and its equivalent in the 2013 Act), but would depend on the terms of the amalgamation and the facts of each case.
