Delhi High Court Declares “DS Group” And Logo Well-Known Trademarks

The Delhi High Court has declared the DS Group trademark and its corresponding logo as well-known trademarks. It also permanently restrained five people and entities sued over a website that allegedly offered fake distributorships of Rajnigandha, the group's popular mouth-freshener brand.Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav passed the judgment on September 25 in a suit brought by DS Intellectual Properties LLP and Dharampal Satyapal Limited, the companies that hold rights in the DS Group and...

No Timeframe For Cancelling Duplicate PAN Can Cause Hardship To Taxpayers: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that the absence of a prescribed timeframe for deciding applications seeking cancellation of duplicate Permanent Account Numbers (PANs) may cause hardship to taxpayers, particularly in relation to filing Income-Tax Returns and availing services linked to PAN.The Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia was dealing with a PIL seeking directions to the authorities to prescribe a timeframe for deciding applications for...

Delhi High Court Quashes Section 153C Income Tax Order, Says Satisfaction Note Was Recorded After Limitation Period

The Delhi High Court has quashed a tax assessment against a company, holding that proceedings initiated on the basis of material found during search proceedings were barred by limitation.The Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Aditi Choudhary observed that the satisfaction note in the case was recorded on June 25, 2021, corresponding to AY 2022-23, whereas the impugned order dated March 30, 2023 concerned AY 2010-11.Petitioner argued that the impugned order had been passed beyond the...

Income Tax | Delhi High Court Quashes Section 153C Notice As Time-Barred, Relies On Ojjus Medicare Ruling

The Delhi High Court has quashed a notice issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, holding that the notice was issued beyond the prescribed limitation period.The Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Aditi Choudhary allowed the writ petition filed by Preeti Chadha, challenging the notice dated July 25, 2022, issued under Section 153C of the Act pursuant to a satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer on June 16, 2022.Petitioner contended...

GST Order Must Disclose Factual Basis For Statutory Ingredients, Not Merely Reproduce Provision: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that an adjudication order invoking Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act must disclose the factual basis on which the statutory ingredients of the provision are said to have been satisfied.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Bharat Parashar observed that mere reproduction of the statutory language, without supporting particulars, would not demonstrate the requisite application of mind.It thus set aside an order confirming a...

Delhi High Court Directs Toplad To Change Name, Finds 'TOPLAD' Too Nearly Resembles 'TOPLAND'

The Delhi High court has directed Toplad Private Limited to change its name, holding that “TOPLAD” too nearly resembles the registered “TOPLAND” trademark of Topland Engines Private Limited. “Except for the letter 'N', both the words completely resemble each other and to the mind of a person with average intelligence, the mere negation of the letter 'N' would not make the names visually or phonetically dissimilar,” Justice Amit Mahajan observed. The court set aside the May 15, 2023 order of...

Delhi High Court Blocks ₹213 Crore Release To British Marine Over Unstamped Arbitral Award Against SAIL

The Delhi High Court has refused to release the remaining ₹213.24 crore deposited by Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) in enforcement proceedings initiated by British Marine PLC. The court held that the arbitral award could not be executed while it remained unstamped and the original award was not available before it.Justice Vinod Kumar observed:“Now the situation is that the original Award is not available before this Court. Though an arbitral Award is a chargeable instrument, as evident...

Delhi High Court Upholds Constitutional Validity Of Sec. 19 In 2018 Commercial Courts Amendment Act

The Delhi High Court on 30 September upheld the constitutional validity of Section 19 of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts (Amendment) Act, 2018, holding that applying the amended regime only to commercial disputes instituted on or after 3 May 2018 does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia dismissed a petition filed by Alpro Industries and others...

Delhi High Court Quashes 2024 Reassessment Notice For AY 2010-11, Says It Is Beyond 10-Year Limit

The Delhi High Court on 30 September held that proceedings under Section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 cannot be initiated beyond the limitation period prescribed under Sections 153A and 153C, and quashed a notice issued for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11. A Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Aditi Choudhary allowed a petition challenging the notice dated 15 February 2024, issued under Section 153C pursuant to a satisfaction note recorded by the Assessing Officer on 7 February 2024....

Delhi High Court Dismisses Insurance Broker's Plea Against Income Tax Reassessment, Cites Earlier Case

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by Zoom Insurance Brokers challenging proceedings initiated under Sections 148A(3) and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, observing that an identical challenge by the company for the preceding assessment year had already been rejected by a Coordinate Bench.The Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Aditi Choudhary noted that the facts of the present case were identical to those considered in Petitioner's earlier case, except for the...

Sahara India Tax Appeals To Be Heard By Delhi ITAT Despite AO's Lucknow Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has allowed a batch of writ petitions filed by Sahara India group companies and directed that their pending income tax appeals be heard by the Delhi Bench of ITAT , even though the Assessing Officer (AO) having jurisdiction over the assessees was situated in Lucknow.The Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Aditi Choudhary noted that more than 100 appeals concerning the assessee's group companies were already being heard by the Delhi Bench and that both the assessees...

Delhi HC Refuses To Quash ₹47.93 Lakh GST Demand, Says Common Supplier Alone Doesn't Bar Parallel Proceedings

The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with a ₹47.93 lakh GST demand against a taxpayer, holding that the mere fact that State and Central GST proceedings involved the same supplier does not, by itself, attract the bar against parallel proceedings under Section 6(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Bharat Parashar held that the expression “same subject matter” under Section 6(2)(b) has to be determined by examining the...