Supreme Court of India
18,256 judgments
Bhimashankar Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Niyamita v. Walchandnagar Industries Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that the statutory maximum limitation period under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act is mandatory and cannot be extended by Section 4 of the Limitation Act or Section 10 of the General Clauses Act when the last day falls during court vacation.
NTPC LTD v. M/S SPML INFRA LTD
The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in appointing an arbitral tribunal under Section 11(6) as the Settlement Agreement was valid and allegations of coercion were not prima facie credible, thus no subsisting arbitrable dispute existed.
International Pvt. Ltd v. The Commissioner
The Supreme Court held that penalty under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act is not leviable for belated remittance of TDS after deduction, limiting penalty to failure to deduct tax at source.
The State of Bihar v. Jawahar Lal Ram
The Supreme Court directed absorption of employees with continuity of service under Article 142, setting aside the High Court's order reversing their termination despite procedural irregularities in the regularization scheme.
Mansarovar Commercial Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi
The Supreme Court held that companies incorporated in Sikkim were residents of India due to control and management being in Delhi, validating reassessment and service of notices under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment years prior to the Act's extension to Sikkim.
Mansarovar Commercial Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi
The Supreme Court upheld that companies incorporated in Sikkim were residents of India due to control and management in Delhi, validating reassessment notices and tax liability under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for pre-extension years.
Rajalakshmi v. The Special Tahsildar (LA) Koyilandy & Another
The Supreme Court enhanced compensation for land acquired for an IT Park, holding that negotiated price is relevant but not binding and awarding a 60% rise over the negotiated price as just compensation.
Rajalakshmi v. The Special Tahsildar (LA) Koyilandy & Another
The Supreme Court enhanced compensation for land acquired for an IT Park by increasing the High Court's award from Rs. 1,35,000/- to Rs. 1,60,000/- per cent, holding that negotiated price is a relevant factor but just compensation requires reasonable enhancement.
KA RAUF SHERIF v. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition seeking transfer of a PMLA money laundering case from Lucknow to Kerala, holding that territorial jurisdiction is determined by the place of money laundering activities and not by residence of accused or witnesses.
Ajay Shankar Srivastava v. Bar Council of India
The Supreme Court constituted a High Powered Committee to monitor verification of advocates' educational and enrollment certificates, directing State Bar Councils and universities to cooperate fully to preserve the integrity of the legal profession.
Ajay Shankar Srivastava v. Bar Council of India
The Supreme Court upheld the necessity of verifying advocates' educational qualifications and enrollment certificates, constituted a High Powered Committee to oversee the process, and directed all stakeholders to cooperate to preserve the integrity of the legal profession.
National Capital Territory of Delhi v. Subhash Chander Khatri
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession was taken prior to the Act's commencement, even if compensation was unpaid, and set aside the High Court's order granting compensation on lapse grounds.
Central Bureau of Investigation v. Vikas Mishra
The Supreme Court allowed CBI's appeal to grant police custody remand beyond 15 days where the accused frustrated interrogation by hospitalization and interim bail, overruling the strict 15-day limit in such circumstances.
HARYANA POWER PURCHASE CENTRE v. SASAN POWER LTD
The Supreme Court held that while bidders must verify information independently, procurers cannot escape liability for grossly erroneous data affecting project costs, directing fresh consideration of water intake cost claims but rejecting customs duty claims on mining equipment as Change in Law.
HARYANA POWER PURCHASE CENTRE v. SASAN POWER LTD
The Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal directing reconsideration of compensation for increased water intake costs due to erroneous pre-bid reports but upheld rejection of customs duty claims on mining equipment under the Electricity Act, 2003 framework.
Income Tax Officer v. Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia
The Supreme Court held that the 2015 amendment to Section 153C of the Income Tax Act cannot be applied retrospectively to searches conducted before 01.06.2015, upholding the High Court's quashing of notices and assessments based on the amended provision.
Income Tax Officer v. Vikram Sujitkumar Bhatia
The Supreme Court held that the 2015 amendment to Section 153C of the Income Tax Act applies retrospectively to searches conducted before the amendment date, validating assessments against third parties based on seized documents 'pertaining to' them.
The Commissioner of Income Tax 7 v. M/s. Paville Projects Pvt. Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that the Commissioner rightly exercised revisional powers under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act to set aside an erroneous and prejudicial assessment order allowing payments to shareholders as cost of improvement.
The Commissioner of Income Tax 7 v. M/s. Paville Projects Pvt. Ltd.
The Supreme Court upheld the Commissioner's revisional order under Section 263, holding that the AO's allowance of shareholder payments as cost of improvement was erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue.
Man Singh v. Shamim Ahmad
A tenant must tender rent directly to the landlord after the landlord's written notice expressing willingness to accept rent; depositing rent in Court thereafter does not prevent eviction under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings Act.