Can ITAT Direct Amortisation Of Royalty Payment Beyond AO's Findings? Delhi High Court To Decide

The Delhi High Court is set to examine whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) could direct the Assessing Officer (AO) to conduct a de novo assessment and amortise a music licence fee when the direction went beyond the case originally set up by the AO. A Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta admitted an appeal filed by Aalap Digital Music Private Limited against an ITAT order concerning Assessment Year 2016-17. The substantial question of law framed by the...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Alleged Fraudsters In Recruitment Scam From Using HCL Marks

The Delhi High Court on 24 August restrained five newly added defendants from using HCL Corporation's trademarks, holding that the company had made out a prima facie case of trademark infringement and passing off in a suit concerning an alleged fraudulent recruitment racket operated in its name. Justice Jyoti Singh extended the interim injunction earlier granted on 10 February 2026 after HCL alleged that the defendants were colluding with the original defendants to impersonate its...

Delhi High Court Rejects Reddy Pharmaceuticals' Review Plea In 'REDDY' Trademark Dispute With DRL

The Delhi High Court on 14 August dismissed a review petition filed by Reddy Pharmaceuticals Ltd., refusing to revisit its earlier judgment upholding a permanent injunction restraining the company from using the mark “REDDY” and directing removal of its registered trademark from the Register of Trade Marks. A Division Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla held that none of the errors alleged by Reddy Pharmaceuticals (RPL) constituted an “error apparent on the...

Delhi High Court Rejects Trademark Appeal Over “DIGESTO PLUS”, Says Mark Common To Trade

The Delhi High Court on 20 August dismissed an appeal filed by Hahnemann Scientific Laboratory India Pvt. Ltd. against Meera Rastogi, trading as Hahnemann Memorial Laboratory, in a trademark dispute over the use of the mark “DIGESTO PLUS”. A Division Bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held that the word “DIGESTO” is common to the trade and cannot, by itself, establish deceptive similarity between competing marks. It observed: “The commonality of the descriptive...

Delhi HC Sets Aside Single Judge's Arbitrator Appointment In International Arbitration, Says SC Has Power

On 20 August, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court set aside a Single Judge's order appointing a retired Supreme Court judge as sole arbitrator to resolve disputes between August Purple Services Private Limited, Axis Trustee Services Limited and other parties, after both sides agreed that the arbitration was an international commercial arbitration. Justices C. Hari Shankar and Vinod Kumar observed that an arbitration becomes an international commercial arbitration where one of the parties...

Delhi High Court Restrains Sale Of Counterfeit SKF Bearings, Calls Them A “Safety Hazard” For Drivers

The Delhi High Court on 21 August temporarily restrained two Delhi-based bearing traders from selling counterfeit ball bearings under the “SKF” mark, observing that the sale of inferior quality bearings could endanger vehicle drivers and was detrimental to public interest. Justice Jyoti Singh passed an ad interim injunction in a suit filed by Swedish bearings manufacturer AB SKF against B.M. Bearing Sales and Oriental Enterprises, and directed Bank of Baroda to freeze proceeds traced to the...

Reasonable Time To Appoint Arbitrator Cannot Be Decided By Counting Days After Notice: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 21 August held that a party's reasonable time to appoint an arbitrator cannot be assessed merely by counting the days after a formal arbitration notice, and that courts must also consider earlier litigation, failed mediation and attempts to agree on an arbitrator. Justice Om Prakash Shukla rejected a prematurity objection in a family partnership dispute and appointed former Supreme Court Judge Justice (Retd.) Ravindra Bhat as sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes...

Delhi High Court Says Writ Courts Should Not Pre-empt MSMED Arbitration, Dismisses BSNL Plea

On 26 August, the Delhi High Court dismissed a petition filed by the General Manager, Telecom District, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), challenging the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council's (MSEFC) reference of a dispute to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and the consequential arbitration proceedings. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma held that writ courts should not pre-emptively interfere with arbitration proceedings under the Micro, Small and Medium...

Delhi Registered Office Doesn't Confer Jurisdiction Over UP Tax Audit Dispute: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 21 August held that merely because the registered office of a company whose accounts were audited is situated in Delhi, it does not mean that any part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court. A Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta dismissed a petition filed by a Chartered Accountants firm challenging a dispute concerning its fee bill and interest arising from its appointment as a Special Auditor. It held: ...

Delhi High Court Stays FSSAI Notice Against FDC's Enerzal For 8 Months Over 'Electrolyte' Label

On 25 August, the Delhi High Court stayed a notice of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) directing FDC Limited to stop using the terms “electrolyte” and “electrolyte drink” on its Enerzal products for eight months, after noting that the company had not been issued an improvement notice under Section 32 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSS Act). Section 32 requires a prior improvement notice giving a food business an opportunity to rectify violations. Justice...

Delhi High Court Restrains Ajmer Spa From Using "ANANTARA" For Similarity With MHG IP Holding's Mark

The Delhi High Court has temporarily restrained Anantara Spa and Massage, an Ajmer-based spa, from using the mark “ANANTARA” or any deceptively similar variant in a trademark infringement suit filed by MHG IP Holding Singapore Pte Ltd which is part of the Minor International Public Company Limited group, widely known as the 'Minor Hotel Group'. Justice Jyoti Singh passed the ex-parte ad interim injunction, noting that MHG IP held valid and subsisting registrations for the ANANTARA mark since...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Sale Of 'SCALP SAYY' Hair Care Products For Similar To 'SAYY'

The Delhi High Court on 21 August temporarily restrained Bhuva Ankitkumar Jaysukhbhai, a sole proprietor from manufacturing, marketing and selling hair care and cosmetic products under the mark “SCALP SAYY”. Justice Jyoti Singh found it deceptively similar to the plaintiff Sayy Partnership Firm's trademark “SAYY”. She observed that the “defendant's mark SCALP SAYY subsumes Plaintiff's mark SAYY (word) in entirety.”The plaintiff claimed to be the prior adopter and user of the mark “SAYY” since...