All High Courts
Gujarat High Court Upholds Classification Of 'Mint Orange 2022' As Industrial Input Under VAT Act
The Gujarat High Court has held that 'Mint Orange 2022' is classifiable as an industrial input under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, clarifying that household use does not prevent a product from being treated as an industrial input when its composition and primary use are industrial in nature.A Division Bench of Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice Pranav Trivedi dismissed the Tax Appeal filed by the Commercial Tax Department, holding that the product qualifies as an aromatic chemical and...
Delhi High Court Questions 'Zora' Trademark Registration, Says Visually Similar To 'Zara'
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday questioned the Registrar of Trade Marks action allowing the registration of the mark “Zora,” observing that it is “visually, receptively similar beyond any doubt” to the global fashion brand “Zara”.The matter arises from a challenge filed by Industria De Diseño Textil, S.A., owner of the brand “Zara,” against an order of the Registrar of Trade Marks permitting registration of the mark “Zora” in Class 24, which covers textile goods and fabrics.Justice Jyoti...
'Reimbursements' Fixed As Percentage Of Sales Are Contractual, Liable For TDS: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has upheld the disallowance of expenses claimed by Deys Medical Private Limited (appellant) on account of alleged reimbursements paid to its group companies, holding that payments calculated as a percentage of sales constituted contractual consideration liable for tax deduction at source (TDS).The appeal arose from an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, which had partially affirmed the Assessing Officer's disallowance of over Rs. 3.35 crore under the...
"I Am Not A God": Godman Aniruddha Bapu Moves Delhi High Court To Restrain Devotees From Portraying Him With Gods
In what it described as a “very surprising suit,” the Delhi High Court on Tuesday heard a personality rights case filed by Mumbai-based godman Dr. Aniruddha Dhairyadhar Joshi, popularly known as Aniruddha Bapu, who is seeking to restrain his own followers from portraying him as a deity. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela remarked during the hearing, “Faith moves mountains… This is something very surprising. You have come up with a very surprising suit,” as the Court considered a plea that does not...
Venue Of Arbitration Is Seat In Absence Of Contrary Indication: J&K&L High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladkah High Court has recently reiterated that where an arbitration clause designates a particular place as the “venue” of arbitration and there is no contrary indication, such place must be treated as the “seat” of arbitration, thereby conferring exclusive jurisdiction on courts at that location."It is, thus settled that whenever there is mention of place of arbitration in an arbitration clause as being the venue of arbitration proceedings, it would really...
Madras High Court Attaches ₹154.63 Crore SEPC Receivables, Appoints PwC To Audit Financial Position
The Madras High Court recently ordered interim attachment of Rs. 154.63 crore from the trade receivables of SEPC Limited, formerly known as Shriram EPC Limited, and appointed an independent auditor to examine its financial position, observing that it “cannot sit like a lame duck” while awaiting submissions from banks claiming charge over the company's assets. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh passed the order in execution petitions filed by GPE (India) Ltd. seeking enforcement of a foreign arbitral...
Bombay High Court Permanently Injuncts 'SUPER ASIAN PLUS' Trademark In Asian Paints Suit
The Bombay High Court has granted a permanent injunction in favour of Asian Paints, holding that the use of the mark “SUPER ASIAN PLUS” was “entirely dishonest and actuated by bad faith” and amounted to trademark infringement and passing off. Justice Arif S. Doctor, on 20 February 2026 also directed three of the defendants to each pay Rs 3 lakh in compensatory costs.Asian Paints submitted that it had been using its house mark “ASIAN PAINTS” continuously since 1952 and the mark “ASIAN” since...
Income Tax | Delay in Filing Form 67 Not Ground to Deny Foreign Tax Credit: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that a mere delay in filing Form 67, the prescribed declaration required to claim credit in India for taxes already paid abroad as required under Rule 128 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 cannot be used to deny an assessee the substantive benefit of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC).A Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Vinod Kumar made the observation while allowing a petition filed by Real Time Data Services Private Limited against the Principal Commissioner of...
Bombay High Court Sets Aside Commercial Suit Review Heard By Another Judge Despite Availability Of Order-Passing Judge
Holding that an alternate judge had effectively “sat in appeal” over a coordinate bench, the Bombay High Court has ruled that a review application cannot be entertained by another judge when the original judge remains available under Order XLVII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. A Division Bench of Justices R.I. Chagla and Advait M. Sethna set aside an ex parte review order passed on April 25, 2025 by an alternate judge of the City Civil Court at Dindoshi, observing that the course adopted...
S.48 Customs Act | Exporter Cannot Stop Customs Action On Return Shipment By Disowning It: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has recently held that an exporter cannot block the entry or processing of a return shipment merely by disowning the consignment, and that once the importer/exporter refuses to clear the goods, the statutory consequences under Section 48 of the Customs Act, 1962 must follow.For context, Section 48 provides the procedure to be followed where the goods are not cleared, warehoused, or transshipped within thirty days from the date of unloading. In the case at hand, the...
Bogus Purchases: Bombay High Court To Examine If ITAT Can Limit Disallowance To Profit Margin
The Bombay High Court has recently admitted an Income Tax Appeal filed by the Department and will examine the correct approach to disallowance in cases involving bogus purchases. A Division Bench of Justice M S Karnik and Justice S.M. Modak, by an order dated February 5, 2026, admitted the Revenue's appeal against Chandrakant L. Nishar The Court recorded the submission of the Revenue's counsel that although the tax effect appeared to be less than Rs.2 crore, the appeal fell within an...