High Court of Bombay

4,240 judgments

Year:

Neena Uppal v. The Union of India

04 Mar 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court directed provisional release of imported betelnuts after holding that the Customs authorities cannot deny clearance contrary to an advance ruling and FSSAI certification absent conclusive evidence of impurity.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Advance Ruling Customs Act, 1962 Food Safety and Standards Authority of India Provisional Release

West India Continental Oils Fats Pvt. Ltd. v. The Union of India

04 Mar 2024 · M. S. Sonak; Advait M. Sethna
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that interest is payable on IGST refunded which was collected under unconstitutional notifications, overruling the respondents' rejection based on CGST Act provisions.

tax appeal_allowed Significant IGST reverse charge mechanism refund interest on refund

Mahesh K. Mehta v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

01 Mar 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court upheld disallowance of interest deduction under Section 14A on borrowed funds invested in shares yielding exempt dividend income, rejecting the dominant purpose test in favor of apportionment.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Section 14A exempt income dividend income interest deduction

Kesar Corporation; Troika Constructions Company; Dattashram Cooperative Housing Society Ltd v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai; Assistant Commissioner (Estate)

01 Mar 2024 · G. S. Patel; Kamal Khata
Cites 0 · Cited by 6

The Bombay High Court held that for compulsorily registrable leasehold transfers, the transfer premium demand under Section 92(dddd) of the MCGM Act arises from the date of registration, not execution, and ordered refund of wrongly collected fees.

civil petition_allowed Significant transfer premium Section 92(dddd) Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act registration of documents Section 47 Registration Act

The State of Maharashtra v. Bhimrao Rohidas Ghadge

01 Mar 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order regularizing the suspension period of a police officer discharged in corruption proceedings where no fresh sanction was obtained and acquittals in related cases were not stayed.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant suspension regularization Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 sanction for prosecution discharge and acquittal

Vedant Baban Nandgavkar v. The Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti

01 Mar 2024 · A. S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging cancellation of admission to 6th standard due to delay, laches, and non-compliance with admission conditions, denying admission to 7th standard thereafter.

administrative petition_dismissed writ petition admission cancellation delay and laches school admission

Shell India Markets Private Limited v. The Union of India

01 Mar 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale

The Bombay High Court held that payments under a Cost Contribution Arrangement for general business support services do not constitute taxable fees for technical services under the India-UK DTAA, quashing the AAR's order requiring tax withholding.

tax petition_allowed Significant fees for technical services make available Cost Contribution Arrangement General Business Support Services

The State of Maharashtra v. Chandrakant Laxman Patil

01 Mar 2024 · S. M. Modak

The High Court upheld the acquittal of the accused for cheating under Section 417 IPC, holding that absence of a false promise from inception negates criminal liability despite consensual sexual intercourse and subsequent breach of promise.

criminal appeal_dismissed Significant Section 417 IPC cheating false promise consent

Era International v. Aditya Birla Global Trading India Private Limited

29 Feb 2024 · Bharati Dangre

The Bombay High Court held that an arbitrator appointed by MCIA was ineligible under Section 12(5) and directed substitution, affirming the Court’s power under Section 14(2) despite institutional arbitration rules.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 14(2) Section 12(5) Seventh Schedule

Jayram Vinayak Deshpande v. Directorate of Enforcement

29 Feb 2024 · M. S. Karnik · 2024:BHC-AS:9792

The Bombay High Court granted bail to Jayram Vinayak Deshpande under PMLA, observing his role was limited to knowingly assisting money laundering unlike the prime accused who was already granted bail by the Supreme Court.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Prevention of Money Laundering Act bail under PMLA money laundering Coastal Regulation Zone

Atul Baban Rupnavar v. State of Maharashtra

29 Feb 2024 · A.S. Chandurkar; Jitendra Jain

The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the examination answer key, holding that courts should not interfere with expert evaluation unless the answer key is palpably wrong or perverse.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant judicial review examination answer key competitive examination Article 226

Shri Indrakumar Jain v. M/s. Dainik Bhaskar

29 Feb 2024 · Nitin Jamdar; Sandeep V. Marne
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Bombay High Court held that working journalists are not 'employees' under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, as the legal fiction treating them as workmen under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, does not extend to that Act.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant working journalist employee definition Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 Working Journalists Act, 1955

Rajghor Ranjhan Jaynatilal v. Election Scrutiny Committee of B.B.A.

29 Feb 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

The Bombay High Court held that the Bombay Bar Association is not a 'State' under Article 12, thus writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not available to challenge its election decisions after conclusion of the election.

constitutional petition_dismissed Significant Article 12 Constitution of India Article 226 Constitution of India State definition Writ jurisdiction

Godrej Industries Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

28 Feb 2024 · K. R. Shriram; Dr. Neela Gokhale
Cites 2 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court held that the reassessment notice issued for AY 2014-15 on 31st July 2022 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is barred by limitation and quashed it, rejecting the Revenue's contention of extended limitation under TOLA and relating back theory.

tax petition_allowed Significant Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 148 Section 148A Section 149

Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. Maharashtra Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council

28 Feb 2024 · G. S. Kulkarni; Firdosh P. Pooniwalla
Cites 0 · Cited by 5

The High Court held that the MSME Facilitation Council can act as both conciliator and arbitrator under the MSME Act despite Section 80 of the Arbitration Act, and dismissed the writ petition challenging this dual role.

civil petition_dismissed Significant MSME Act Arbitration and Conciliation Act Section 18 MSME Act Section 80 Arbitration Act

Sudha Banarasilal Sharma v. State of Maharashtra and K.P. Shankaran Nair

28 Feb 2024 · A.S. Gadkari; Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition to quash FIR alleging forgery and cheating in flat allotment, holding that disputed factual issues pending trial cannot be decided in writ or inherent jurisdiction.

criminal petition_dismissed quashing of FIR Article 226 Constitution Section 482 CrPC forgery

Urban Infrastructure Trustees Ltd and Anr. v. Joyce Realtors Pvt. Ltd.

27 Feb 2024 · Abhay Ahuja

The Bombay High Court allowed amendments to plaints before trial commencement under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, holding that such amendments clarifying admissions do not alter the cause of action and should be liberally permitted to ensure effective adjudication.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order 6 Rule 17 CPC Amendment of pleadings Commencement of trial Affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief

Mohan Velji Patel & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

27 Feb 2024 · A. S. Gadkari; Shyam C. Chandak

The Bombay High Court quashed a delayed FIR alleging cheating under Section 420 IPC, holding that no prima facie offence was made out and the complaint was an abuse of process of law.

criminal petition_allowed Significant quashing of FIR Section 420 IPC Section 482 CrPC Article 226 Constitution

Nikhil Girish Patt; Ilesh Shah; Sooraj Kumar Tayade v. Central Bureau of Investigation; State of Maharashtra

27 Feb 2024 · M. S. Karnik
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Bombay High Court upheld the trial court's power under Section 216 Cr.P.C. to add an aggravated forgery charge at the late stage of trial, dismissing the petitioners' challenge that such addition caused prejudice.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant Section 216 Cr.P.C. alteration of charge addition of charge aggravated forgery

Pen Municipal Council v. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

27 Feb 2024 · Milind N. Jadhav

The Bombay High Court quashed PF assessment and attachment orders against Municipal Councils for non-payment of Contractors’ PF dues, directing fresh inquiry with proper summoning of Contractors and adherence to natural justice.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 Section 7A Section 8F principal employer liability