Madras High Court
No Service Tax Exemption Where Overriding Commission Is Received In INR: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court held that travel agents acting as General Sales Agents (GSAs) for foreign airlines cannot claim service tax exemption as an export of services when their overriding commission is received in Indian Rupees rather than convertible foreign exchange, even if the services are provided to foreign principals. A Division Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar held that exemption notifications are to be strictly construed, and the condition requiring...
Madras High Court Approves Settlement Favouring SNS Movies In 'Think Studio' Trademark Dispute
The Madras High Court on 23 February decreed a trademark infringement suit in favour of SNS Movies Productions LLP, owner of Think Studios, after Manjunath, the proprietor of a rival firm, named Think Studio, undertook to permanently cease using the contested mark. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy recorded a settlement in which the defendant agreed to withdraw its pending trademark application and remove the infringing name from all digital and physical platforms by 10 April 2026. He noted: ...
Arbitrator Appointed By Agreed Institution Not Per Se Unilateral: Madras High Court
Drawing a clear distinction between unilateral appointments and institutional nominations, the Madras High Court has held that an arbitrator appointed by an arbitral institution agreed upon by the parties cannot automatically be treated as a unilateral appointee, even if one side initiates the process. “The appointment of Arbitral Tribunal by an institution that is agreed upon between the parties per se cannot be dealt with in the same manner in which the Court deals with an unilateral...
Importer Who Voluntarily Pays Differential Customs Duty, Seeks DRI Probe Closure Cannot Claim Refund: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court on Wednesday held that differential customs duty voluntarily paid during a Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) investigation cannot be claimed as a refund. The Court further held that Notification No. 25/2019-Customs amended the applicable customs duty rate by treating shrimp larvae feed in both pellet and non-pellet form as attracting 5% basic customs duty. The notification cannot be applied retrospectively to imports made prior to its issuance.The judgment was...
Duty-Free Import Benefits Denied Over Unauthorised Diversion, Poor Record-Keeping: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court on 10 February, held that duty-free import benefits under the Advance Authorisation Scheme can be denied when the importer diverts the goods into the domestic market without authorisation.A Bench of Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan and Justice R. Poornima allowed the Department's appeals, arising from a batch of civil miscellaneous appeals filed by the Commissioner of Customs (Department) against the proprietor of Regin Agency, and Regin Exports.Setting aside the CESTAT's order,...
Madras High Court Attaches ₹154.63 Crore SEPC Receivables, Appoints PwC To Audit Financial Position
The Madras High Court recently ordered interim attachment of Rs. 154.63 crore from the trade receivables of SEPC Limited, formerly known as Shriram EPC Limited, and appointed an independent auditor to examine its financial position, observing that it “cannot sit like a lame duck” while awaiting submissions from banks claiming charge over the company's assets. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh passed the order in execution petitions filed by GPE (India) Ltd. seeking enforcement of a foreign arbitral...
Madras High Court Restrains Unauthorised Broadcast Of Zee's 'Do Deewane Seher Mein' On Release Date
On the date the film “DO DEEWANE SEHER MEIN” was slated for release, the Madras High Court granted an ad interim injunction restraining unlawful broadcast of the movie in a suit alleging apprehended infringement of copyright. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy passed the order on Friday in two applications filed by Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited, the producers of the film, which has arrayed 33 defendants, including Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited and others. The court recorded that the suit...
Madras High Court Restrains Unauthorised Broadcast Of Taapsee Pannu Starrer 'Assi' On Release Day
The Madras High Court on Friday restrained the unauthorised broadcast of the Taapsee Pannu-starrer Bollywood film 'Assi' on the day of its release, granting ad-interim relief to its producer. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, by order dated February 20, 2026, observed that “in matters of this nature, it is likely that irreversible injury will occur unless unlawful broadcast is prevented.” At the same time, the Court noted that “in view of the expansive nature of the relief claimed, it is...
Madras High Court Quashes ₹1.10 Crore Award Against Annai Builders For "Unintelligible" Findings
The Madras High Court on 17 February set aside a Rs. 1.10 crore arbitral award passed against Annai Builders Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., holding that the arbitrator's findings were unintelligible as two disputed running bills were allowed without examining objections of duplicate claims and excess payment, and by ignoring a detailed 242-page expert report assessing actual construction progress. A Single Bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh held that the award suffered from perversity and patent...
Pro Volleyball League Dispute: Madras High Court Upholds ₹4 Crore Award Against Volleyball Federation Of India
The Madras High Court on Tuesday refused to interfere with an arbitral award directing the Volleyball Federation of India to pay Rs.4 crore as loss of profits to Baseline Ventures, the former promoter of the Pro Volleyball League, holding that the federation's termination of the 2018 agreement was unjustified. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh held that the award dated November 21, 2020 “does not suffer from any perversity or patent illegality warranting the interference of this Court." The Court...
Madras High Court Warns Against Mechanical Notices, Orders Decision On 14-Year-Old Cancer Drug Patent
The Madras High Court on 12 February observed that the Intellectual Property Office cannot mechanically issue notices or summons whenever pre-grant patent oppositions are received, warning that such an approach makes it “very easy to defeat the rights” of patent applicants. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh issued directions in a case involving a 14-year-old patent application filed by Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. for a cancer drug. Noting that by “postponing the same for one reason and the other”...