Delhi High Court

36,663 judgments

Year:

M/S SHIVANGI POLY PRODUCT v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3562-DB

Delhi High Court dismissed writ petition challenging GST show cause notice and order but granted time to file appeal, pending Supreme Court’s decision on validity of limitation extension notifications under GST Act.

tax petition_dismissed Significant show cause notice limitation GST Act Section 168A

M/S Garg India Plastics v. Union of India & Anr.

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3561-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside an ex-parte GST adjudication order for denial of hearing and portal access, granting the petitioner opportunity to reply and be heard, while leaving the validity of the impugned notification to the Supreme Court.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant show cause notice natural justice GST portal access Section 168A GST Act

M/S Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3559-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to file a rectification application against a GST demand order while leaving the validity of the impugned notification extending adjudication timelines open pending Supreme Court decision.

tax petition_allowed Significant Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 168A Section 161 Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax

Shree Krishna Steel Traders v. Union of India & Ors.

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3563-DB

Delhi High Court permits appeal against GST adjudication order while leaving the validity of extension notifications under Section 168A CGST Act to be decided by the Supreme Court.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Goods and Services Tax Section 73 CGST Act Section 168A CGST Act Adjudication order

Shivam Iron Store v. Union of India

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3569-DB

Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging GST show cause notice and order, granted time to file appeal, and left validity of extension notifications to Supreme Court's decision.

tax petition_dismissed Significant show cause notice Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 168A extension of limitation

Laxmi Plastic Products v. Commissioner of DGST & Ors.

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3557-DB

The Delhi High Court directed the appellate authority to adjudicate the petitioner's appeal on merits without dismissal on limitation grounds, while leaving the validity of GST extension notifications open pending Supreme Court decision.

tax appeal_allowed Significant GST Act Section 168A show cause notice extension of limitation

DJ Associates v. Commissioner of DGST & Ors.

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3558-DB

Delhi High Court set aside ex-parte GST adjudication order for failure to afford hearing, granting petitioner opportunity to reply pending Supreme Court's decision on validity of related notifications.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant show cause notice natural justice ex-parte order Section 168A GST Act

Tek Xplore v. The Principal Commissioner State Tax Delhi & Ors.

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3587-DB

The Delhi High Court declined to interfere with a tax adjudication order pending Supreme Court decisions on the validity of related notifications and statutory provisions, allowing the petitioner to pursue statutory appeals on merits.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section 168A CGST Act Notification 56/2023-Central Tax Show Cause Notice

M/S SHREE JAIN POLYMERS v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3593-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld adjudication orders where the petitioner had opportunity to be heard but allowed appeals to be filed without limitation bar pending Supreme Court’s decision on the validity of GST notifications extending limitation periods.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Section 168A Central GST Act Show Cause Notice Natural Justice Extension of Limitation

Union of India & Ors. v. Manish Sharma

06 May 2025 · Navin Chawla; Renu Bhatnagar · 2025:DHC:3452-DB

The High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing a fresh medical examination due to discrepancies between medical boards' findings and dismissed the Union of India's petition challenging it.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Medical Examination Board Review Medical Examination Recruitment Process Notable Discrepancy

Calvin Klein Trademark Trust v. Mr. Gurvinder Singh & Ors.

06 May 2025 · Amit Bansal · ILR (2014) 2 Del 1288

The Delhi High Court granted permanent injunction and awarded damages against defendants manufacturing and selling counterfeit Calvin Klein goods, decreeing the suit without trial due to defendants' non-appearance and infringement of registered trademarks and copyrights.

civil appeal_allowed Significant trademark infringement copyright infringement passing off permanent injunction

ADM AGRO INDUSTRIES LATUR AND VIZAG PRIVATE LIMITED v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), DELHI AND ANR

06 May 2025 · Vibhu Bakhru; Tejas Karia · 2025:DHC:3375-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that a reassessment notice under Section 148 issued beyond the extended limitation period, after considering statutory exclusions and Supreme Court directions, is invalid and quashed the impugned notice.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act Section 148A Income Tax Act Section 149 Income Tax Act limitation period

Tata Power Renewable Energy Limited v. DCM Textiles Limited

06 May 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:3616
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that judicial scrutiny at this stage is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and not the merits of the dispute.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11 appointment of arbitrator scope of judicial scrutiny arbitration agreement

TATA CAPITAL LTD v. DINESH VASWANI

06 May 2025 · Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav · 2025:DHC:3614
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that at the Section 11 stage, judicial scrutiny is limited to prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appointed a sole arbitrator as per the loan agreement's arbitration clause.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 appointment of arbitrator prima facie existence arbitration agreement

Nirmal Kumar Singh v. The Securities and Exchange Board of India

06 May 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:3331

The Delhi High Court upheld framing of charges against a Director under the SEBI Act for unauthorized CIS operations, holding that prima facie case exists and quashing at pre-trial stage is unwarranted without unimpeachable evidence.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 482 CrPC SEBI Act 1992 Section 24(1) SEBI Act Section 27 SEBI Act

M/S Mahesh Fabrinox Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr.

06 May 2025 · Prathiba M. Singh; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta · 2025:DHC:3476-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a CGST order holding that no violation of natural justice occurred and the petitioner was involved in fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit through fabricated invoices.

tax petition_dismissed Significant Input Tax Credit CGST Act 2017 fraudulent ITC writ jurisdiction

SH RAM NARAIN v. SH SUBHASH YADAV & ORS

06 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3524

The High Court held that interlocutory orders not finally disposing of the suit are not amenable to revision under Section 115 CPC and dismissed the petition accordingly.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 115 CPC revision petition interlocutory order Order VI Rule 17 CPC

SH RAM NARAIN v. SH SUBHASH YADAV & ORS

06 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3523

The High Court held that interlocutory orders not finally disposing of the suit are not amenable to revision under Section 115 CPC and dismissed the petition accordingly.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 115 CPC revision jurisdiction interlocutory order final disposal

SH RAM NARAIN v. SH SUBHASH YADAV & ORS

06 May 2025 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:3522

The High Court held that revision under Section 115 CPC is not maintainable against interlocutory orders that do not finally dispose of the suit, dismissing the petition accordingly.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Section 115 CPC revision jurisdiction interlocutory order final disposal

Ravi Raj Sabharwal v. Dalit Manav Utthan Sansthan

06 May 2025 · Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:3332

The Delhi High Court allowed possession to the landlord on admissions, holding that an unregistered MOU cannot confer possession rights under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act after lease expiry.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XII Rule 6 CPC Order XV Rule 1 CPC Section 53A Transfer of Property Act Section 108(B)(q) Transfer of Property Act