GST Introduced After Tender Cannot Be Treated As Included In Quoted Rates: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court at Nagpur has ruled that a contractor cannot be denied GST reimbursement by relying on tender clauses requiring quoted rates to include “applicable taxes” when GST was not in existence when the tender was issued.A Division Bench of Justice Anil S. Kilor and Justice Raj D. Wakode, relying on the tender clasues observed,"The taxes which are not recoverable by the Government from the contractors, on the date of tender, cannot be the basis for quoting the rates while submitting...

'Tragic Picture Of IP Rights Ecosystem': Bombay High Court Rules Scientist, Not IIT Bombay, Owns Invention After 13-Year Battle

Observing that prolonged proceedings over a patent application had cost a scientist 13 years out of the 20-year statutory patent protection period, the Bombay High Court has recognised him as the sole owner of the invention and directed that his patent application be considered on merits. Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan was dealing with a petition filed by Dr. Tarkeshwar Chandrakant Patil, an original inventor named in the patent application filed by IIT Bombay for an invention titled “An...

Stamp Duty Authority Need Not Wait For Flat Sales To Assess Development Agreement: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that an agreed share of future sale proceeds under a development agreement can be taken into account while determining the market value of an instrument for stamp duty. The stamp authority does not have to wait for the project to be completed or for the flats to be sold before assessing the consideration agreed between the parties. Justice Amit Borkar relied on the court's earlier decision in Kolte Patil to reject the argument that future sale proceeds could not be...

Bombay High Court Directs Trader To Deposit ₹1.32 Crore For Breaching NOVA Trademark Injunction

The Bombay High Court on 1 September directed a trader who had appealed against an Rs. 82.42 lakh costs order for violating a trademark injunction to deposit an additional Rs. 50 lakh, taking the total amount to Rs. 1.32 crore. A Division Bench of Justices A. S. Gadkari and Kamal Khata passed the direction after noting that the appellant had not complied with the directions in the Single Bench's order dated 13 July 2026. The judges held: “Appellant is directed to deposit the entire cost...

Information-Seeking Notice Cannot Be Treated As Show Cause Notice In Transfer Pricing Case: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that notices issued by a Transfer Pricing Officer seeking information from a taxpayer cannot substitute the show cause notice required before determining the arm's length price.A Division Bench of Justice B.P. Colabawalla and Justice Farhan P. Dubash observed, “Further the notice issued by the Transfer Pricing Officer under Section 92CA(2) of the Act seeking information from an Assessee cannot be said to be a Show Cause Notice issued as per the proviso to Section...

Asian Paints Trademark Suit: Bombay High Court Orders Forcible Possession Of Entire Paint Factory In Ghaziabad

The Bombay High Court has directed its Court Receiver to take forcible physical possession of an entire paint manufacturing premises in Ghaziabad. The direction came after an Additional Special Receiver was allegedly obstructed while executing an earlier injunction order.Justice Madhav J. Jamdar passed the direction on August 31 in a commercial intellectual property dispute involving Asian Paints Limited and Deepak Kumar Panwar, who operates Akshay Paints Industries in Ghaziabad.The court...

Bombay High Court Restrains Sale Of Counterfeit 'CLEAR' Packaged Drinking Water

The Bombay High Court has restrained a Karnataka-based business from using the “CLEAR/CLEAR AQUA IND” mark after finding the impugned products to be counterfeit. The court had earlier observed that “AQUA IND” was shown in negligible font while prominence was given to “CLEAR”, and that the rival products had identical bottle shapes, label marks, colour schemes and placement of features.Justice Madhav J. Jamdar allowed Energy Beverages Pvt. Ltd.'s interim application in terms of prayers (a) to (e)...

Authority Letter Allowing Partner To “Deal” With Firm Property Not Blanket Sale Power: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that an authority letter allowing a partner to “deal” with partnership property cannot by itself be treated as a blanket power to sell or transfer the firm's immovable properties.The court observed that the authority letters gave the partner “authority of some substance”, but did not confer an unrestricted power to sell or transfer the firm's immovable properties.Justice Amit Borkar, while deciding a plea under the Arbitration Act seeking interim relief...

Nehle Pe Dehla Rights Row: Bombay High Court Awards ₹1.92 Crore To Ultra Distributors

The Bombay High Court has declared Ultra Distributors Pvt. Ltd. the sole and exclusive holder of the video, cable television and video-on-demand rights to the 1976 Bollywood film Nehle Pe Dehla, starring Sunil Dutt, Vinod Khanna and Saira Banu. Justice Arif S. Doctor held that the March 31, 2005 agreement under which Dhariwal Films assigned these rights to Ultra was valid and binding.The court also held that Dhariwal Films failed to provide Ultra with Digibeta Master tapes of commercially...

Bombay High Court Sets Aside ₹21.93 Crore Stamp Duty Demand Against Wadhwa Constructions

The Bombay High Court on 7 September set aside a stamp duty demand of about Rs. 21.93 crore against Wadhwa Constructions & Infrastructure Private Limited in connection with a Joint Development Agreement, holding that the valuation had wrongly taken into account development rights and benefits that did not exist on the date of the agreement. A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Amit Borkar set aside the valuation adopted by the Collector of Stamps and the appellate authority. He observed that...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue Appeal Against Millennium Beer Industries Over ₹21.92 Cr Service Tax

The Bombay High Court on 3 September dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the setting aside of a Rs. 21.92 crore demand against Millennium Beer Industries Ltd., holding that the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked to raise a service tax demand without establishing fraud, collusion or suppression of facts with an intent to evade tax, and A Division Bench of Justices Nitin B. Suryawanshi and Abasaheb D. Shinde also held that the Revenue cannot take different stands in substantially...

Formal Notice Of Arbitral Award Not Always Needed To Start Limitation For Challenge: Bombay HIgh Court

The Bombay High Court has reiterated that the limitation for challenging an arbitral award under the Arbitration Act, 1940, need not remain paused until formal court notice is issued if the party is otherwise aware of the award.Relying on apex court rulings, the court ruled, “The precise form of what constitutes as a 'notice' of filing the Award is unspecified. However, interpreted reasonably, what must be required is that the parties come to know about the existence of the Award so that any...