High Court of Bombay

5,131 judgments

Year:

Ashwini Ashish Dighe v. The Union of India

27 Jan 2022 · M. S. Sonak; Jitendra Jain
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The Bombay High Court held that rejection of MEIS scrip application is an appealable order under the Foreign Trade Act and quashed the non-speaking rejection and appellate orders, remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 MEIS duty credit scrip adjudicating authority appeal under Section 15

Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Asst./Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 77(1)(1)

24 Jan 2022 · K.R. Shriram; N.J. Jamadar
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court quashed the reopening notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2012-13, holding that reopening beyond four years requires failure to disclose material facts and cannot be based on change of opinion or audit objections alone.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act reopening of assessment change of opinion failure to disclose material facts

Raziya Abdul Kadir Shaikh v. Union of India

24 Jan 2022 · N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court allowed the appeal and awarded compensation to the appellant, holding that absence of a ticket does not negate bona fide passenger status and that death by accidental falling from a train must be liberally construed under the Railways Act.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Railways Act 1989 Section 124-A untoward incident bona fide passenger

Nabeel Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

21 Jan 2022 · R. D. Dhanuka; S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court held that admission of tax liability during investigation before the cut-off date qualifies as quantification under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, and rejection of the petitioner's declaration without personal hearing violated natural justice, thus remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019 tax liability quantification service tax investigation and enquiry

Bajaj Energy Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

21 Jan 2022 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court held that reopening of income tax assessment based on a mere change of opinion without new tangible material is invalid and quashed the reassessment notice and order.

tax petition_allowed Significant reopening of assessment Section 148 Income Tax Act change of opinion tangible material

Ashwini Ashish Dighe v. The Union of India

20 Jan 2022 · Dipankar Datta; Milind N. Jadhav
Cites 3 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld rejection of MEIS benefits to a DTA unit supplying goods to an FTWZ unit, emphasizing the need for documentary proof of direct export transactions with overseas buyers to claim export incentives.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Merchandise Export from India Scheme MEIS Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20 Free Trade and Warehousing Zone

Anmol Steel Processors Private Limited v. Colour Roof (India) Limited

19 Jan 2022 · R. D. Dhanuka; R. N. Laddha

The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal challenging an arbitral award, holding that part payments appropriated against specific invoices do not extend limitation for other claims, and that the claims were barred by limitation.

commercial_arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant limitation acknowledgment of debt part payment appropriation of payment

Parinee Realty Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

19 Jan 2022 · K.R. Shriram; R.N. Laddha
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that reopening an income tax assessment within four years must be based on tangible material and not mere change of opinion, quashing the reopening notice issued against Parinee Realty Pvt. Ltd.

tax petition_allowed Significant Section 148 Income Tax Act reopening assessment change of opinion tangible material

Mosa Anand Rajulu v. M/s. V. Ships Monaco and Another

19 Jan 2022 · N.J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court held that compensation under the Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 must be awarded as per the Act’s provisions and unregistered agreements like the TCC Agreement cannot be enforced to claim higher compensation.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 Section 15 Section 28 Compensation agreement registration

Manisha Dnyneshwar Londhe v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

19 Jan 2022 · R. D. Dhanuka; R. N. Laddha
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Bombay High Court held that compassionate appointments are exceptions to recruitment bans and directed approval of the petitioner’s appointment made on compassionate grounds following due procedure.

administrative petition_allowed Significant compassionate appointment government resolution recruitment ban grant-in-aid school

Dr. Dipak Vishwnathrao Muley v. State of Maharashtra

18 Jan 2022 · R.D. Dhanuka; Abhay Ahuja
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that departmental proceedings initiated post-retirement without prior government sanction are void, quashing the chargesheet and directing release of pension benefits.

administrative petition_allowed Significant departmental enquiry chargesheet post-retirement proceedings Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982

Harvinder Kaur Vishakha Singh & Ors. v. Tarvinder Singh K. Singh & Ors.

17 Jan 2022 · N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court allowed compensation to the dependents of a truck driver who died of heart failure accelerated by prolonged driving, holding such death as an accident arising out of employment under the Employees Compensation Act.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Employees Compensation Act, 1923 employer-employee relationship death due to heart attack accident arising out of employment

Pimpri Chinchwad Sahakari Bank Maryadit v. Arun Namdeo Pote

17 Jan 2022 · Amit Borkar

The High Court held that summary recovery under Section 101 requires strict procedural compliance and genuine disputes supported by material must be adjudicated under Section 91, remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 Section 101 summary recovery Recovery Certificate Section 154(2A) deposit requirement

Khan Mohammed Arif Lallan v. Dilip Bhausaheb Lande

13 Jan 2022 · Sandeep K. Shinde J.

The Bombay High Court dismissed the election petition for failure to plead essential material facts necessary to establish corrupt practices and materially affect the election result under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

constitutional appeal_dismissed Significant Election Petition Material Facts Corrupt Practices Representation of the People Act, 1951

Balasaheb Dattoba Pawar Thru LR and Anr v. Lalasaheb Dattoba Pawar and Ors

13 Jan 2022 · S. M. Modak

The High Court held that probate conclusively determines the validity of a will, barring civil courts from reopening that issue in title suits, and directed deletion of related issues and striking off pleadings challenging the will to prevent abuse of process.

civil appeal_allowed Significant probate validity of will res judicata partition suit

Madhavrao Bhagwatrao Rajebahadur and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

12 Jan 2022 · R. D. Dhanuka; S. M. Modak

The Bombay High Court directed fresh land acquisition proceedings and compensation assessment under the 2013 Act after quashing an earlier award, ensuring fair compensation to petitioners whose land was utilized by the government.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant land acquisition Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 writ petition

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. The State of Maharashtra

12 Jan 2022 · G.S. Kulkarni; Rajesh S. Patil

The Bombay High Court held that possession orders under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act must be executed promptly without being stalled by third party civil suits, which must be challenged only under Section 17 before the DRT.

civil petition_allowed Significant SARFAESI Act Section 14 SARFAESI Section 17 SARFAESI District Magistrate powers

Jayant Industries v. Indian Tobacco Company (ITC)

11 Jan 2022 · B. P. Colabawalla

The Bombay High Court dismissed the Plaintiff's copyright and passing off suit under Order XIII-A CPC for lack of real prospect of success due to fabricated evidence and abuse of process, awarding costs to the Defendant.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XIII-A CPC summary judgment copyright infringement passing off

Oracle Financial Services Software Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of India

10 Jan 2022 · K.R. Shriram; N. J. Jamadar

The Bombay High Court quashed the reopening of income tax assessment for AY 2014-15, holding that mere change of opinion without tangible material does not justify reassessment under section 147.

tax petition_allowed Significant reopening of assessment section 147 Income Tax Act reason to believe mere change of opinion

Parvathi Venkatesh v. State of Maharashtra

10 Jan 2022 · R. D. Dhanuka; Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court held that a government servant discharged without fault before superannuation is entitled to compensation pension under MCS Pension Rules, and arbitrary denial of pension violates constitutional rights.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant compensation pension Maharashtra Civil Services Pension Rules superannuation pension annual increment