High Court
Bombay High Court Says Income Tax Assessment Cannot Stand On Quashed Revision Order
The Bombay High Court has ruled that an assessment order cannot survive when the revision order on which it was based has already been quashed by the income tax tribunal.Justice G.S. Kulkarni and Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale observed that the Assessing Officer could not have proceeded with the assessment after the tribunal had quashed the underlying Section 263 order. The court also rejected the Revenue's contention that the pending challenge against the tribunal's decision changed this...
Acer Must Give Prior Notice To MeitY, DoT When Relief Is Sought Against Them In Trademark Suit: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has rejected Acer Incorporated's attempt to treat the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) as mere “formal” or “compliance” parties in its trademark infringement suit.Justice A.D. Maria Clete observed, "The CPC does not create separate categories of Government defendants described as 'formal', 'pro forma' or 'compliance' defendants for the purpose of Section 80. The applicability of Section 80 must be...
Punjab & Haryana High Court Disposes Sony India Plea Against 2006 VAT Entry Substitution
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has disposed of a plea filed by Sony India Private Limited concerning its claim for a concessional VAT rate of 4% on Digital Still Image Cameras, holding that the company was not prejudiced by the notification it had challenged.A bench of Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Yashvir Singh Rathor observed that the expression “IT Products”, which formed the basis of Sony's claim for the concessional rate, continued to remain part of Entry No. 60...
Trademark Suits Cannot Be Tried By Courts Below District Court: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has ruled that a trademark infringement suit cannot be tried by a court below the District Court merely because its pecuniary value falls within the jurisdiction of a Munsiff Court.Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. held that “Given the above, the District Court, for the purposes of Section 134, has to be regarded as the lowest grade competent court to try a trade mark suit, under Section 15 CPC. To hold otherwise would result in a court inferior to the District Court ultimately...
Tata Motors Finance 'Took Law In Its Hands' By Acting On Ex Parte Arbitral Award To Auction Truck: Patna HIgh Court
The Patna High Court has held that Tata Motors Finance Limited could not proceed against a borrower's commercial vehicle on the basis of an ex parte arbitral award without following the prescribed enforcement process.Justice Girijish Kumar observed that the finance company had failed to act under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and had “taken the law in its hand," which was impermissible.Section 36 requires an enforceable arbitral award to be enforced in the same manner...
Bombay High Court Rejects Taxpayer's Apprehension Of Recovery Based On Communication Of Audit Findings
The Bombay High Court has held that a taxpayer's apprehension that GST authorities would effect recovery on the basis of audit findings communicated to it was misconceived. “The apprehension of the petitioner that the recovery will be effected on the basis of such information is misconceived,” a Division Bench of Justice M.S. Karnik and Justice Sandesh D. Patil observed. The court added that the GST Department would have to take further action in accordance with the CGST Act.The ruling came on a...
Delhi High Court Says Failed Conciliation Talks Cannot Be Used To Decide Arbitration Claims
The Delhi High Court has ruled that material recorded during unsuccessful conciliation cannot later be relied upon to decide the same dispute in arbitration. Justice Avneesh Jhingan observed that the confidentiality of such proceedings must continue even after a settlement attempt fails.“The proceedings during conciliation cannot be considered and relied upon in case the arbitration of dispute is necessitated. The proceedings during conciliation are different but when an issue is contested equal...
Madras High Court Refuses Preethi Hospitals Permission To Sue Over 'S. Preethi' College Name
The Madras High Court has recently refused to grant leave to Madurai-based Preethi Hospitals Private Limited and Blossom Global Trust to sue an educational trust in Sivagangai over its use of the name “S. Preethi” for a group of colleges.Justice A.D. Maria Clete held that the applicants had not shown that any part of the cause of action arose within the court's Chennai jurisdiction. The court observed, “It is the act of the respondent pleaded to have been done within these local limits that the...
Gold Imported In Violation Of Restrictions Is 'Prohibited Goods' Under Customs Act: Calcutta High Court
On Thursday, 10 September, the Calcutta High Court held that gold imported into India in violation of applicable import restrictions can be treated as “prohibited goods” under Section 2(33) of the Customs Act, 1962, even though gold is not absolutely prohibited from being imported into the country. A Division Bench comprising Justices Debangsu Basak and Aryak Dutt allowed the Customs Department's appeals and dismissed the appeals filed by Gopal Saha and Ajgar Seikh, setting aside the Single...
Karnataka High Court Quashes Orders Enforcing 2% Cess On Cinema Tickets, Allows Multiplexes' Plea
The Karnataka High Court has allowed a plea filed by the Multiplex Association of India and PVR INOX Limited against the enforcement of the 2% cess imposed on cinema tickets under the Karnataka Cine and Cultural Activists (Welfare) Act, 2024. Justice H.T. Narendra Prasad held that the measures seeking to operationalise and enforce the cess could not be sustained as the 2024 Act had not been brought into force through a valid commencement notification under Section 1(2). The matter was first...
SEZ Units Cannot Be Denied Stamp Duty Exemption Due To Pre-Ordinance Lease: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court on 2 September held that an SEZ unit cannot be denied exemption from stamp duty and registration fee merely because its lease deed was executed before the Gujarat Special Economic Zone Ordinance, 2004 came into force, where the investment was made on the basis of the State Government's earlier SEZ policy promising such fiscal incentives. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D.N. Ray dismissed the State Government's appeal against an order...