Gujarat High Court
Even Non-Signatory Family Members Are Bound By Consent Award Executed By Heads Of Family: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court held that once heads of two families amicably resolve disputes through composite family arrangement and a consent arbitral award, individual family members cannot later challenge the award even if they were non-signatories on grounds of non-receipt of a signed copy of the award or lack of individual consent. A bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D.N. Ray held that family arrangements if executed bona fide and voluntarily are binding on all...
NCLT Has Jurisdiction U/S 60(5)(C) IBC To Adjudicate Lease Disputes In Liquidation Proceedings: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court bench led by Justice Niral R. Mehta held that the NCLT has jurisdiction under section 60(5)(c) of the IBC to adjudicate the lease and license dispute during the liquidation proceedings. The petitioners, Fivebro Water Services Pvt. Ltd. and another, had the lease and license agreements with the corporate debtor for its premises in Ahmedabad and Mumbai. Thereafter, the liquidation of the corporate debtor was ordered. The liquidator filed an application...
Statutory Interest Mandatorily Payable U/S 56 GST Act On Refunds Delayed Beyond 60 Days: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court held that statutory interest mandatorily payable under Section 56 GST Act on refunds delayed beyond 60 days. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi stated that the provision of section 56 of the GST Act is a mandatory provision and the interest which is required to be paid under section 56 is compensatory in nature for delayed payment of refund which otherwise is not in dispute. In this case, the petitioner/assessee filed 05 Shipping Bills of Polyester...
Income Tax | Manual Filing Of Appeal By NRI Valid For DTVSV Scheme Benefits: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court held that the manual filing of an appeal by an NRI is valid for DTVSV (Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024) Scheme Benefits. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi were addressing the case where the petitioner/assessee has challenged the communication issued by the respondent authorities, whereby the declaration made by the assessee under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 ('DTVSV Scheme, 2024'), is rejected on the ground that the appeal...
[Arbitration Act] Doctrine Of Merger Inapplicable When Superior Forum Has Not Decided Issue In Question: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court held that the doctrine of merger does not preclude the decree holder from claiming post award interest at 18% under section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act). The court quashed an order passed by the Principal District Judge by which it rejected the review application. The court directed the State of Gujarat to recalculate and pay interest on the sum adjudged in the arbitral award. A bench led by Justice Maulik J. Shelat held...
Gujarat High Court Stays IBBI Disciplinary Committee's Order Suspending Resolution Professional For 6 Months
The Gujarat High Court last week stayed an order issued by Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) which had suspended the registration of an insolvency resolution professional for six months pursuant to disciplinary proceedings. The court passed the order after the petitioner questioned the procedure by which the disciplinary proceedings were conducted. Justice Mauna M Bhatt issued notice on the petitioner's plea challenging an August 20 order passed by the Disciplinary...
Writ Court Interfering With Every Procedural Order In Arbitral Proceedings Is Contrary To Aim Of A&C Act: Gujarat HC
The Gujarat High Court while dismissing a writ petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution observed that the Writ Court can exercise their power only in cases where the only if the order in questions is “completely perverse”, or the order in questions is crippled with “bad faith” or the order in questions falls in the category of “rarest of rare circumstances”.The bench of Justice Mauna M. Bhatt further held that if the Writ Court exercises its jurisdiction in curing every...
GST Officers Issuing Summons/Arrest Memo Not Required To Be Cross-Examined By Assessee: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court held that GST officers issuing summons/arrest memo are not required to be cross-examined by assessee. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi observed that the assessee wants to cross-examine the persons who belongs to the department who have either issued the summons or arrest memo. Such persons are not required to be cross-examined by the assessee. The assessee/petitioner a proprietor of M/s. KSEG India International was accused of availing the input...
Gujarat High Court Upholds Validity Of GST Advisory On Interest For Delayed Tax Payment
The Gujarat High Court has upheld the validity of the GST advisory on interest for delayed tax payment. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi stated that the reference to Section 79 of the GST Act in the advisory is only to put the assessee on guard as to such outstanding liability as per the record of the Authority so that the assessee can either make the payment of such liability if agreed or may oppose the same when the notice in Form GST DRC-01D is received by the assessee...
DTAA Prevails Over S.206AA Of Income Tax Act For TDS On Payments To Non-Residents Without PAN: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court stated that DTAA (Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement) prevails over Section 206AA of Income Tax Act for TDS on payments to non-residents without PAN. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi was addressing the appeals pertains to alleged short deduction of TDS and raising demand by invoking provisions of section 206AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 206AA of Income Tax Act, 1961 requires every taxpayer who receives taxable income to furnish their...
State Tax Authorities Not Mandated To Issue DIN With Orders Or Summons: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court stated that state tax authorities not mandated to issue din with orders or summons. The Division Bench of Justices Bhargav D. Karia andP.M. Ravalobserved that “there is no mechanism of issuance of DIN on any of the communication, notice, summons, orders issued by the State Tax Authorities. In such circumstances, the contention raised on behalf of the assessee, that the DIN is not mentioned in any of the summons and the previously attachment order being without...
When Court Lacks Jurisdiction To Entertain Application U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act, It Cannot Set Aside Award On Merits: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D.N. Ray and has held that Once the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the Section 34 application—having been filed beyond the limitation prescribed under Section 34(3) and its proviso—any finding on the validity of the arbitral award as void ab initio was without legal authority. Entertaining a time-barred application under Section 34 was a grave error of law on the part of the learned Court. Brief Facts: ...



![[Arbitration Act] Doctrine Of Merger Inapplicable When Superior Forum Has Not Decided Issue In Question: Gujarat High Court [Arbitration Act] Doctrine Of Merger Inapplicable When Superior Forum Has Not Decided Issue In Question: Gujarat High Court](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2025/09/27/500x300_623068-justice-maulik-jitendra-shelat-gujarat-high-court.webp)



