LiveLawBiz IBC Weekly Digest: February 2 To February 7, 2026

SUPREME COURTSingle Insolvency Petition Against Intrinsically Linked Real Estate Companies Maintainable: Supreme CourtCase Title : Satinder Singh Bhasin v. Col Gautam Mullick and Ors Case Number : Civil Appeal No.13628 of 2025 CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 37The Supreme Court on Monday upheld insolvency proceedings against two closely linked real estate companies, holding that a single insolvency petition can be maintained against multiple corporate entities under the...

LiveLawBiz Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: February 02 - February 08, 2026

NOMINAL INDEX Rajia Begum vs Barnali Mukherjee, 2026 LLBiz SC 36C Velusamy v K Indhera, 2026 LLBiz SC 39Eminent Colonizers Private Limited v Rajasthan Housing Board & Ors, 2026 LLBiz SC 48A2Z Infraservices Ltd and Anr v Quippo Infrastructure Ltd and Anr, 2026 LLBiz SC 42Avneet Soni v Kavita Agarwal, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 108Union of India v Reliance Industries Ltd & Anr, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 11Puri Constructions Pvt Ltd & Ors v Larsen & Toubro Ltd, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 119Dusters...

RERA Cases Weekly Round-Up: February 02 - February 08, 2026

Nominal IndexRalas and Chopda Builders & Ors v Jeevan Vihar Residents Welfare Society 2026 LLBiz HC (CHH) 4M s Pareena Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v Mabood Aryaman 2026 LLBiz REAT (HR) 6Alpha Corp Development Private Limited v Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority Panchkula 2026 LLBiz REAT (HR) 7Venkata Krishna Moorthy Kavaturu v M s Ramanuja Temple County Pvt Ltd 2026 LLBiz RERA (TS) 23High CourtChattisgarh High CourtRERA Cannot Examine Municipal Completion Certificates Issued Before It Came...

Supreme Court Issues Notice On Challenge To Delhi HC View That Customs Need Not Communicate Adjudication Time Extension

The Supreme Court recently (February 6) issued notice in a challenge to a Delhi High Court ruling that held that customs authorities were not required to communicate an extension granted for completing adjudication proceedings and directed that the matter be heard along with a pending appeal. A bench comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe issued notice in the special leave petition filed by Pranij Heights India Pvt. Ltd. and directed that it be listed along with the pending SLP in...

Service Tax On Ocean Freight In CIF Imports Illegal: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that service tax cannot be levied on ocean freight in imports made on a CIF (Cost, Insurance and Freight) basis, as such services fall outside the scope of the Finance Act, 1994.“The Act itself would be inapplicable to territories other than India and the Executive would not have the power to make rules for territories beyond India and where the events could be described to be extra territorial events i.e., service provided by a foreign exporter and a...

GST Knowledge Series: Questions and Answers On GST For Transportation Of Goods By Road [Part 1]

Everything businesses need to know about GST on transportation of goods by road explained through Q&A, Part 1 of the GST Knowledge Series with Swamy Associates

LiveLawBiz Indirect Tax Weekly Round-Up: February 02 - February 08, 2026

SUPREME COURTSupreme Court Allows ₹2.9 Crore GST Refund On Coal To SAIL, Rejects Revenue ChallengeCase Title : The State of Jharkhand & Ors. vs. Steel Authority of India Limited Case Number : Special leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 38758/2025 CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 32The Supreme Court on 23 January 2026 dismissed a Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue, challenging a refund of about Rs. 2.9 crore granted to the Steel Authority of India's (SAIL) Bokaro plant in the initial years...

LiveLawBiz Direct Tax Weekly Round-Up: February 02 - February 08, 2026

SUPREME COURTSupreme Court Dismisses Revenue Plea Against Gujarat HC Order Quashing Adani Wilmar Income Tax ReassessmentCase Title : THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(1) Vs ADANI WILMAR LIMITED Case Number : SLP(C) 4944/2026 CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 35The Supreme Court on Monday refused to interfere with a Gujarat High Court judgment that had quashed the reopening of Adani Wilmar Limited's income tax assessment for the 2013–14 assessment year, dismissing a special leave...

LiveLawBiz: Business Law Daily Round-Up: February 07, 2026

IBC Inconsistencies Between E-Auction Notice And Process Memo Vitiate Liquidation Sale: NCLT AmaravatiIPRDelhi High Court Bars Unauthorised Use Of Vivek Oberoi's Name, Image and VoiceAfter 50 Years, Delhi High Court Bars Both Registered Proprietor And Prior User From Using 'FIELDMARSHAL' For PumpsTAXGSTAT Delhi Upholds ₹90.9 Lakh Profiteering Finding Against Wai Wai Noodles MakerCBDT Issues Draft Income Tax Rules And Forms For New Act With 34% Fewer Rules [Read Draft Rules Here]Punjab and...

Supreme Court Cuts Compensation Order Against ITC Maurya From ₹2 Crore to ₹25 Lakh In Botched Haircut Case

The Supreme Court on Friday clarified that compensation running into crores of rupees cannot be awarded on “presumptions or whims and fancies” of a complainant and must be founded on “trustworthy and reliable evidence”. The clarification came while the court was examining a consumer dispute arising from services rendered at the ITC Maurya hotel in New Delhi, where the complainant had alleged deficiency in service relating to a haircut and sought compensation running into crores of rupees. A...

CBDT Issues Draft Income Tax Rules And Forms For New Act With 34% Fewer Rules [Read Draft Rules Here]

The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has released the draft Income Tax Rules, 2026 along with the draft forms, in connection with the Income Tax Act, 2025, which is scheduled to come into force from April 1, 2026. The draft rules and forms have been placed in the public domain to invite comments and suggestions from stakeholders and the general public.As per the CBDT, the draft Income Tax Rules, 2026 will remain open for public feedback for a period of 15 days, up to February 22,...

Confiscation Under PMLA Cannot Proceed While Appeal Against Attachment Is Pending: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday (February 6) held that confiscation proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cannot be taken forward while an appeal against the confirmation of attachment is pending before the Appellate Tribunal. The Court clarified that once an attachment order passed under Section 8(3) of the PMLA is challenged under Section 26, a “deemed embargo” operates, preventing the Special Court from deciding confiscation proceedings under Section 8(7) until the...