Delhi High Court Grants Jahnvi Kapoor Relief Against Obscene Content, Commercial Misuse Of Persona

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday declined to grant a blanket injunction sought by actor Jahnvi Kapoor against 6,884 URLs that she claimed infringed her personality rights.Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani indicated that interim relief could be considered for three categories of content. These were content that is ex facie obscene or pornographic, content that directly monetises Kapoor's personality rights, and content using her name and likeness to promote the sale of merchandise or services.Kapoor...

Assessing Officer Can't Become An Economist To Question Expected Return In Share Valuation: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that an Assessing Officer (AO) cannot act as an economist to determine the expected rate of return while examining a company's share valuation.The Division Bench of Justices Dinesh Mehta and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta added that while the AO may identify flaws in the valuation methodology adopted by a taxpayer, he cannot substitute the commercial assumptions underlying a recognized valuation method with his own.The Court made the observations while dismissing the Income...

Delhi High Court Orders Banks To De-freeze Provisional GST Attachments After 1 Year Unless Fresh Order Served

The Delhi High Court has directed all banks and financial institutions to de-freeze bank accounts provisionally attached under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act), upon the expiry of one year from the date of attachment, unless a fresh attachment order is issued in accordance with law.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Shail Jain also directed the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to issue a circular to all scheduled banks and financial institutions to...

Employment Disputes Not Commercial Disputes Under Commercial Courts Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 7 August 2026 clarified that disputes arising from employment contracts, including claims for salary arrears and increments, do not qualify as “commercial disputes” under Section 2(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, but held that a Commercial Court must return such a plaint instead of dismissing the suit. A Division Bench comprising Justices Prathiba M Singh and Vikas Mahajan upheld the finding that the dispute between Ram Lakhan Shukla and his employer was not a...

Delhi High Court Accepts Customs Apology For Failing To Video-Record Statement In Gold Seizure Case

The court, however, cautioned the Customs Department to be careful in future and comply with its directions scrupulously, as no directions can be taken lightly

Delhi High Court Sets Aside ₹6.35 Crore Award Over Unilateral Arbitrator Appointment By Defence Ministry

The Delhi High Court has set aside a ₹6.35 crore arbitral award in favour of Goodrich Foodtech Ltd. in a dispute with the Ministry of Defence over contracts for supplying malted milk food with cocoa.Justice Subramonium Prasad held that the unilateral appointment of the arbitrator by the Union through its Competent Financial Authority was invalid under Section 12(5) read with the Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court found that the authority was part of the...

Delhi High Court Says Final Relief Can Be Granted At Interim Stage If Strong Prima Facie Case Exists

The court applied the principle to allow release of the Hyatt Regency Hotel's title deeds to Asian Hotels, while safeguarding the rival claimant by requiring a ₹159.66 crore court deposit

Delhi High Court Says Admissibility Of Electronic Evidence In GST Dispute Must Be Decided By Appellate Authority

The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a writ petition challenging a GST demand on the ground that it was based on inadmissible third-party electronic evidence, holding that questions relating to the admissibility, authenticity, and evidentiary value of electronic records are matters to be examined by the statutory appellate authority and not in writ jurisdiction.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Shail Jain dismissed a petition challenging an order passed under Section 74...

Delhi High Court Seeks Centre's Response On PIL Seeking Automatic TDS Refunds For Non-Taxable Individuals

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought the response of the Union Government and the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) on a public interest litigation seeking an automatic mechanism to refund Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) to individuals whose income falls below the taxable limit without requiring them to file income tax returns (ITRs). A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela issued notice on the petition filed by petitioner-in-person Aakash...

Customs Settlement Limitation Excludes Period When Interim Board Could Not Function: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 4 August held that the period during which the Interim Board for Settlement remained unable to function due to lack of quorum must be excluded while calculating the statutory limitation period for deciding customs settlement applications. A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Shail Jain set aside the communications issued by the Interim Board treating the Petitioner's settlement proceedings as having abated under Section 127C(12) of the Customs Act, 1962,...

Interest On Duty Drawback Payable From LEO Date Not Adjudication Order: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 3 August held that interest on delayed duty drawback becomes payable one month after issuance of the Let Export Order (LEO), and the pendency of adjudication proceedings cannot postpone the statutory liability under Section 75A of the Customs Act (which provides for payment of interest on delayed drawback). A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Shail Jain dismissed the Revenue's appeal against Siddhachalam Exports Pvt. Ltd., holding that the exporter was...

Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain Challenge To CGST Act Provision Governing Provisional Release Of Seized Goods

The Delhi High Court has declined to interfere with a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 67(6) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which governs the provisional release of goods seized during search proceedings.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Shail Jain observed that a petitioner questioning the validity of a statutory provision must establish that it infringes a constitutional mandate.Petitioner had contended that the expression "on...