CCI Need Not Record Reasoned Order Before Ordering DG Probe: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has recently held that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) need not record a separate, reasoned order setting out its prima facie opinion before directing the Director General (DG) to investigate under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002.“Section 26(1) does not contemplate recording of a reasoned order by the Commission,” a Division Bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar and Justice Arjun Ray Mukherjee observed. The Bench, however, found that the CCI had formed a...

Delhi High Court Upholds Auction Of Judgment Debtor's Property Share Despite Pre-Attachment Transfer

The Delhi High Court has upheld the auction of a judgment debtor's one-half undivided share in a Delhi property. The share had been transferred before formal attachment, but the court held that the transfer could not take it outside the pending execution proceedings.A Division Bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Shail Jain held that the property had already been identified in the execution petition. Its attachment and sale had also been sought before the transfer.“That claim cannot...

Calcutta High Court Upholds ITAT Order Deleting ₹11.35 Crore Addition For Alleged Cash Loans

On 5 October, the Calcutta High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's (ITAT) September 2025 order deleting a Rs. 11.35 crore addition made against businessman Suresh Kumar Banthia for Assessment Year 2020-21. A Division Bench comprising Justices Rajarshi Bharadwaj and Sudip Deb held that although the strict rules of evidence do not apply to income-tax proceedings, tax authorities and tribunals are guided by the general principles underlying the law of...

Revenue Cannot Reopen Assessment Over Additions Already Pending In Tax Appeals: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court on 16 September held that the Revenue cannot reopen an assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act and pursue parallel proceedings where the same additions have already been examined by the CIT(A) on merits and remain subject matter of tax appeals before the High Court. A Division Bench comprising Justices A.S. Supehia and Vaibhavi D. Nanavati quashed reassessment proceedings initiated against Venus Township (India) LLP, finding that the reassessment sought to...

Director Of Public Company Cannot Be Made Liable For Tax Dues Due To Substantial Shareholding: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has held that a public limited company cannot be treated as a private company merely because one of its directors holds a substantial number of shares. Thus, a director cannot be held personally liable for the company's unpaid tax merely because the director holds substantial shares in the company.The case concerned Section 179 of the Income Tax Act. The provision allows the Income Tax Department, in certain circumstances, to recover a private company's unpaid tax from its...

Kerala High Court Upholds GST Recovery Against Satwa Solutions For Failure To Raise Timely Objection

The Kerala High Court on 26 September refused to interfere with GST recovery proceedings against Satwa Solutions and upheld the dismissal of its writ petition challenging the proceedings arising from a statutory notice and subsequent final order. A Division Bench comprising Justices Devan Ramachandran and Basant Balaji held that the taxpayer had failed to raise its objection to the notice at the appropriate stage. It observed: “It is unmistakable from the attendant circumstances, that the...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Entire LIC Award After Finding Arbitrator's Appointment Impermissible

On 6 October, the Delhi High Court allowed Life Insurance Corporation of India's (LIC) appeal against N.S. Associates Pvt. Ltd., extending the effect of an earlier Single Judge finding that LIC's unilateral appointment of the arbitrator was impermissible.A Division Bench comprising Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Bharat Parashar held that a party cannot challenge an arbitral tribunal's authority to undo unfavourable claims while simultaneously seeking to preserve favourable portions of...

Are All Promoter-Allottee RERA Disputes Non-Arbitrable? Bombay HC Refers Question To Larger Bench

The Bombay High Court has referred to a larger Bench the question of whether every dispute between a real estate promoter and an individual flat buyer under an agreement for sale governed by RERA is non-arbitrable as a class. The court will consider whether arbitrability must instead be examined by looking at the subject matter, nature of relief and the matters RERA authorities are empowered to determine.Justice Amit Borkar observed, “The issue is whether the existence of a statutory forum under...

Choosing Arbitrator From Opponent's Unilateral Panel Does Not Waive Ineligibility: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 6 October held that selecting an arbitrator from a panel unilaterally constituted by the opposite party does not amount to waiver of the statutory ineligibility under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, even if the party subsequently participates in the arbitration. A Division Bench comprising Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Bharat Parashar allowed Newton Engineering and Chemicals Limited's appeal, holding that a mechanism where one party alone...

Insight Portal Screenshots Without Underlying Material Can't Sustain Reassessment: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court on 7 September held that reassessment proceedings cannot be sustained where the Revenue relies merely on screenshots from the Insight Portal without furnishing the underlying reports and material allegedly linking the taxpayer to accommodation transactions. A Division Bench comprising Justices A.S. Supehia and Vaibhavi D. Nanavati quashed the reassessment proceedings against Jyoti CNC Automation Ltd., finding that the notice issued under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax...

Cheque Number Discrepancy Must Be Examined At Trial, Not Quashing Stage: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on 28 September held that a discrepancy in the cheque number mentioned in a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act complaint and the complainant's subsequent police statement is a factual issue that cannot be decided at the stage of quashing the prosecution. Justice Suraj Govindaraj dismissed Umesh K.G.'s petition seeking to quash the proceedings initiated by Bharathi H.N. over an alleged failure to honour a cheque for Rs. 40 lakh. The Bench observed: “The discrepancy...

Participation In Arbitration Does Not Waive Government's Right To Challenge Limitation: J&K High Court

On 6 October, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that the government does not waive its right to challenge stale claims merely by participating in arbitration or failing to raise limitation during proceedings for appointment of an arbitrator. A Division Bench comprising Justices Rajnesh Oswal and Rahul Bharti dismissed a contractor's appeal against the setting aside of most of an arbitral award concerning work on the Wangat Weir at the Upper Sindh Hydel Project-II...