High Court of Bombay
5,061 judgments
Pushpa Nahata v. Income Tax Officer & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment beyond four years without fresh tangible material or failure to disclose material facts is invalid, quashing the reassessment order as a mere impermissible change of opinion.
Geeta P. Kamat v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-10
The Bombay High Court held that a director cannot be held liable under section 179 of the Income Tax Act for company tax dues without proof of gross neglect, misfeasance, or breach of duty causing non-recovery.
Mumbai Postal Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer
The Bombay High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment beyond four years without tangible material showing failure to disclose material facts is impermissible and set aside the reassessment order against a co-operative credit society claiming deduction under Section 80P.
Gousiya Firoz Khan v. The Commissioner of Police
The Bombay High Court quashed a preventive detention order against a person already in judicial custody for lack of cogent material and subjective satisfaction regarding the likelihood of bail and necessity of detention.
Kumar Ramu Rathod v. The State of Maharashtra
The High Court held that the appellant's offence amounted to theft under Section 379 IPC and not robbery under Section 392 IPC, modifying the conviction and sentence accordingly while upholding other convictions.
M/s. Radha Vishweshwar Co-operative Housing Society Limited v. M/s. New Bansi Park Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
The Court held that in a common layout with buildings constructed under different FSI regimes, land division must consider base FSI entitlement, upholding Defendant No.1-Society's decree and conveyance and permitting redevelopment without injunctions restraining land use up to 2276 sq.mtrs.
Qatar National Bank Alahli v. Man Industries (India) Limited
The Bombay High Court held that an irrevocable and unconditional Counter Bank Guarantee governed by Egyptian law is an independent contract that must be honored without injunction unless exceptional grounds exist, and Indian courts lack jurisdiction to entertain disputes concerning it.
Pritam Vijay Anuse & Ors. v. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that cancellation of admissions of students to Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya during the Covid-19 pandemic on hyper-technical grounds was unjustified and directed their admission to be reinstated, affirming the right to education under the RTE Act.
State of Maharashtra v. Raghunath Dnyandev Katkar
The High Court set aside the acquittal of a police officer under the Prevention of Corruption Act, holding that acceptance of illegal gratification for doing an official act is punishable and appellate courts may interfere with acquittals based on improper appreciation of evidence.
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Mrunal Makarand Patwardhan
The Bombay High Court held that a burst tyre causing a motor accident is not an act of God but negligence, upheld the compensation award with minor reduction, and clarified principles for assessing deceased's income and compensation.
Satardekar and ors v. Life Insurance Corporation of India and anr.
The court held that a contract induced by misrepresentation as to the contracting party is voidable, refused specific performance due to absence of privity and misrepresentation, but ordered refund of consideration with interest.
Chidanand Ogyappa Yammi & Ors. v. Girish Sahakari Samudaik Krishi Sangh & Ors.
The Bombay High Court held that exemption under Section 43A of the Bombay Tenancy Act can only be granted by State Government notification, quashing the MRT order that relied on a non-existent exemption certificate issued by the District Deputy Registrar.
Priyanka Prakash Kulkarni v. The Maharashtra Public Service Commission
The Bombay High Court upheld the rejection of a candidate's request to change her application category post-examination based on a corrigendum relaxing certificate validity, affirming that category changes after application submission are impermissible.
M. L. Sandbhor v. Sulochana Walimbe & Ors.
The Bombay High Court upheld the appellate court's order rejecting a belated counter claim filed after amendment and framing of issues on limitation grounds in a cooperative society dispute.
Abdul Aziz Bharmar & Anr. v. Vinod Anand & Ors.
The Court held that utilization of TDR generated from suit land on adjoining land does not confer ownership rights in the adjoining land or flats constructed thereon, and the adjoining landowner cannot be impleaded as a party in the suit concerning the suit land.
D.K. Realty India Private Limited v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax
The Bombay High Court held that reopening an income tax assessment without new material, after the issue was examined in the original scrutiny assessment, amounts to an impermissible change of opinion and quashed the reassessment notice.
Lok Developers v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
The Bombay High Court held that reassessment notices under section 148 must be served on the primary or updated email ID as per the last filed return, and service on a secondary email ID alone vitiates the proceedings.
Macleods Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Union of India
The Bombay High Court upheld the IPAB's order cancelling the petitioner's trademark registration for "OFLOMAC" due to deceptive similarity with respondent's earlier mark "OFRAMAX" in pharmaceutical products.
Sangharsh Alias Bhavya Nitin Adsul v. The Commissioner of Police Pune City
The Bombay High Court set aside a detention order due to unconstitutional delay in considering the petitioner's representation, affirming the requirement of expeditious disposal under Article 22(5) of the Constitution.
Eskay Hospitality Services India Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Sterling Hospitality
The Bombay High Court held that a suit by an unregistered partnership firm to enforce contractual rights arising from its core business is barred under Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, and accordingly allowed the writ petition to reject the plaint.