DIN On Tax Appellate Order Does Not Prove It Was Delivered To Taxpayer: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that the presence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) on an appellate order does not, by itself, establish that the order was served on the assessee. The court ruled that the DIN cannot be used to establish the date of service for calculating the limitation period for an appeal.A Division Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice S. Raveekumar was dealing with a batch of nine appeals filed by Greaves Cotton Ltd. challenging CESTAT orders dismissing its...

Separate GST Proceedings Not Barred If Subject Matter Is Different: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that separate GST proceedings against a taxpayer are not barred under Section 6(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, where the allegations, material relied upon and nature of the alleged defaults in the two proceedings are different.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Bharat Parashar made the observation while dealing with a petition filed by Star Traders challenging proceedings initiated by the GST authorities for alleged wrongful...

Madras High Court Dismisses RPG Enterprises' Plea To Cancel RPG Marble Trademark, Citing 15-Year Acquiescence

The Madras High Court has dismissed a rectification petition filed by RPG Enterprises seeking removal of the trademark "RPG Marble Pvt. Ltd." from the Trade Marks Register.The court observed that the company sat on its rights for nearly fifteen years after learning of the mark and is therefore barred by the doctrine of acquiescence.Justice K. Kumaresh Babu delivered the judgment on September 28, dismissing the petition filed by RPG Enterprises Limited against the Registrar of Trademarks and RPG...

Customs Can't Levy Interest For Period Before Liability Was Determined In Confiscation Proceedings: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that Customs authorities cannot calculate interest for a period during which the liability sought to be subjected to interest had itself not been determined.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Shail Jain made the observation while partly allowing a petition filed by Vishal Oil and Lubricants Co., challenging the interest reflected in the Customs EDI System in respect of a Bill of Entry filed in 2015.The Court directed the Customs authorities to...

Delhi High Court Restrains Pune Seller From Using "Max Volvo", "Max Volwo" Marks In Volvo's Trademark Suit

The Delhi High Court has restrained a Pune-based lubricant seller from manufacturing or selling engine oil, gear oil and other lubricants under the marks "Max Volvo" and "Max Volwo."The court held that these infringe the trademark rights of Swedish auto company Volvo. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav passed the ad interim injunction on September 24 in a suit filed by Aktiebolaget Volvo and two other group companies, which together own and use the "VOLVO" trademark globally and in India,...

GST Audit Proceedings Distinct From Section 74 Adjudication; Delhi High Court Declines To Quash SCN

The Delhi High Court has held that proceedings arising from a GST audit are distinct from the subsequent adjudicatory proceedings initiated under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Bharat Parashar declined to interfere with a show cause notice issued to a pharmaceutical distributor under Section 74, observing that the taxpayer could raise all its objections before the competent adjudicating authority.The Court was...

Central, State GST Officers Can Exercise Cross-Empowerment Powers Without Separate Notification: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has ruled that Central and State GST officers can exercise cross-empowerment under Section 6 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act even without a separate government notification. The notification is required only when the government wants to impose conditions on the exercise of those powers, the court observed.A Division Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice S. Raveekumar was dealing with a batch of 22 writ appeals. Sixteen were filed by State GST authorities and...

Should 20-Year Patent Term Start From Filing Or Grant Despite Delay In Grant? Supreme Court To Decide

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice on a special leave petition challenging the constitutional validity of the law under which a patent's 20-year term runs from the date of filing, even where years of that term pass before the patent is granted. A bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe issued notice on the plea. The court had, on September 21, appointed Advocate Kruttika Vijay as amicus curiae to assist it. The petition challenges an April 22, 2025,...

GST Act | Personal Penalty Can Apply To Non-Taxable Persons For Transactions From January 1, 2021: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the expression “any person” under Section 122(1A) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 is not confined to a “taxable person” and can include persons who are not registered or liable to be registered under the GST regime.At the same time, the Court ruled that Section 122(1A), which provides for personal penalties in specified fraudulent GST transactions, operates prospectively and can be invoked only in respect of acts or transactions committed...

Communication On Company Letterhead Not Enough To Establish Consent To Arbitrate: Bombay High Court

Today, the Bombay High Court held that use of a company's letterhead in project-related communications does not by itself make the company a party to another company's contract or establish its consent to the arbitration clause. Justice Amit Borkar made the observation while referring the dispute between New Consolidated Construction Company Limited (NCCCL) and Limitless Contracting Private Limited concerning construction works at the “One Park Avenue” project in Kolshet, Thane, to arbitration,...

Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash NI Case Over Cheque After Vijaya Bank Merger With Bank of Baroda

The Karnataka High Court on 17 September refused to quash proceedings against Bhadramma under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that the merger of Vijaya Bank with Bank of Baroda did not invalidate the cheque in question. Justice Suraj Govindaraj held that a cheque drawn on a bank that has merged with another bank cannot be treated as invalid merely because of the merger. The Bench observed: “….. a cheque which had been issued on a bank which has merged with another bank...

Delhi High Court Appoints Arbitrator, Local Commissioner In Amazon-Goodluck ₹182.50 Cr. Lease Dispute

The Delhi High Court on 28 September appointed a Local Commissioner to inspect and prepare an inventory of Amazon Seller Services Private Limited's assets lying at premises leased from Goodluck Buildtech Private Limited. Justice Om Prakash Shukla also appointed former Supreme Court judge Justice S. Ravindra Bhat as sole arbitrator to adjudicate the lease dispute between the two parties, involving an indemnity claim of approximately Rs. 182.50 crore and fixtures and fit-outs stated to be worth...