Delhi High Court
Construction Of Terms Of Contract Must Be Primarily Decided By Arbitrator, Not Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has held that Construction of the terms of the contract is primarily for the arbitrator to decide, unless it is found that such a construction is not at all possible. Brief Facts: After a competitive bidding process, a contract was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent. The contract required the supply of 8000 MT of rails within 3 months from the date of establishment of the letter of credit. There were...
Suo Moto Disallowance Made By Assessee Under Bonafide Belief Of Tax Liability Can Be Rectified U/S 264 Of Income Tax Act Without Amending ITR: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has held that an application for revision under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be preferred by an assessee who makes suo motu disallowance in its Return of Income (RoI/ ITR), under a bonafide yet mistaken belief that the same was liable to be offered for taxation.A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar added that the assessee cannot be denied relief merely on the ground that the application was moved without amending the...
Date Of Assessment Order Recommending Penalty For Accepting Cash Above ₹2 Lakh Not Relevant For Determining Limitation U/S 275 Of Income Tax Act: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has held that the date of the assessment order, wherein an Assessing Officer recommended separate penalty proceedings against the assessee under Section 271DA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for accepting more than ₹2 lakh in cash, is not relevant for determining the limitation period under Section 275(1)(c).Section 275(1)(c) prescribes the period of limitation within which penalty proceedings are to be completed.A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice...
Ensure Counsel Appearing On Advance Service Are Instructed Properly: Delhi HC Asks Customs, GST Department, DRI And DGGI To Frame SOP
The Delhi High Court has asked the Customs Department, the Central GST Department, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Directorate of General GST Intelligence (DGGI) to make sure that counsel representing them on advance service are instructed properly.A bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma ordered the Commissioner of Customs to prepare an SOP as to the manner in which the Department shall ensure that instructions are given to the nominated Counsels in the matter...
Fees Paid By Law Firm Remfry & Sagar To Use Name & Goodwill Of Founder Is Business Expense, Deductible U/S 37 Of Income Tax Act: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has held that the fees paid by IPR law firm Remfry & Sagar to acquire the goodwill vested in a company run by the family members of its deceased founder, is a business expense deductible under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act.A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja observed, “the primary, nay, sole purpose for incurring expenditure towards license fee was to use the words “Remfry & Sagar” and derive benefit of the goodwill attached to it. The...
'Composer Can't Assign Rights Of Movie Song' : Delhi High Court Rejects Ilaiyarajaa's Copyright Claim For 'En Iniya Pon Nilave' Song
In a copyright infringement suit filed by Saregama India Limited against Vels Film International Limited concerning the song 'Iniya Pon Nilave', the Delhi High Court has ruled that Saregama is the owner of the song. However, the Court allowed Vels Film to use the song in its film 'Aghathiyaa', following Saregama's acceptance of a license fee of Rs.30 lakh from Vels Film.Justice Mini Pushkarna further observed that the music composer of the original song Ilaiyaraja had no right to assign the...
Foreign Nationals Coming To India Not Required To Declare Personal Gold Jewellery To Customs: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that foreign nationals coming to India need not declare to the Customs Department their gold jewellery which they are carrying for bonafide personal use.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dharmesh Sharma further held that the Customs Department must make a distinction between 'jewellery' and 'personal jewellery', while seizing items for violation of the Baggage Rules, 2016 which are framed under the Customs Act, 1962.Thus in the facts and...
Co-Owner Of Property Not Receiving Income From It Not Liable To Pay Tax On Income From Such Property: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that where a property is held jointly but only one co-owner reaps the benefit of income from such property, the other co-owner cannot be held liable to pay tax merely by virtue of co-ownership.A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar observed, “the [Income Tax] Act fails to raise any presumption in law, of income necessarily arising or being liable to be assessed in the hands of an individual merely because it be a signatory to an...
'No Unnecessary Reporting On Parties' Submissions': Delhi High Court In ANI's Copyright Infringement Suit Against OpenAI
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday indicated that there will be no “unnecessary reporting” by media on the submission filed by parties involved in the copyright infringement suit filed by news agency Asian News International (ANI) against OpenAI Inc, which founded ChatGPT.ANI has accused OpenAI of unauthorisedly using its original news content.The development ensued after Senior Advocate Amit Sibal appearing for OpenAI today brought the attention of the Court to various news reports based on the...
Appointment Of Arbitrator In International Commercial Arbitration By HC Does Not Vitiate Award: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that the appointment of the Arbitrator in an International Commercial Arbitration (“ICA”) by the Chief Justice of the High Court, does not vitiate the impugned award. The bench held that the objection to the appointment of the arbitrator should have been raised during the arbitration proceedings. Since the parties failed to do so, they were deemed to have waived their right to object. Brief Facts of the case: Cross...
Time Spent To Defend Reassessment Notice Issued Without Following Procedure Doesn't Extend Limitation For Revenue When Issuing Fresh Notice: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has held that if the Revenue issues a reassessment notice to an assessee under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without following due procedure, it cannot later issue fresh reassessment notice beyond the prescribed period, claiming that time spent on earlier litigation is to be excluded for the purposes of computing limitation.A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed, “Notice issued under Section 148 of the Act in...
Moratorium U/S 14 Of IBC Doesn't Exempt Promoter From Complying With Mandatory Pre-Deposit Required U/S 43(5) Of RERA: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur has held that the moratorium imposed under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), does not exempt a promoter from complying with the mandatory pre-deposit requirement under Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (RERA). It was observed that the moratorium applied only to the particular project under insolvency proceedings and not to other...