Supreme Court of India
8,449 judgments
Swetab Kumar v. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change
The Supreme Court held that declarations under the 2020 Advisory grant immunity from prosecution under the 2022 Amendment Act unless proper procedural safeguards and public notice are provided, prohibiting retrospective criminalization.
State Bank of India v. Rajesh Agrawal
The Supreme Court held that before classifying a bank account as fraudulent under RBI's Master Direction, affected parties must be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing in accordance with natural justice and constitutional guarantees.
State Bank of India v. Rajesh Agrawal
The Supreme Court held that RBI's classification of bank accounts as fraudulent must comply with natural justice principles, requiring prior notice and hearing before imposing serious civil consequences.
State Bank of India & Ors v. Rajesh Agarwal & Ors
The Supreme Court held that principles of natural justice, including the right to be heard, must be read into RBI's Master Directions on Frauds before classifying borrower accounts as fraudulent due to serious civil consequences.
Kamukayi & Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
The Supreme Court held that the deceased was a bona fide passenger who died due to an untoward railway incident, entitling the appellants to compensation under the Railways Act, setting aside lower courts' dismissals.
Vinay Minda v. Income Tax Commissioner
The Supreme Court held that the two-year limitation period for reassessment following search and seizure under the Income Tax Act begins from the date of the last panchnama prepared, not the date of the last search warrant.
Anil Minda and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax
The Supreme Court held that the two-year limitation period for block assessments under Section 158BE of the Income Tax Act begins from the date of the last Panchnama drawn, not the date of the last search authorization.
Vinil Minda v. Income Tax Commissioner
The Supreme Court held that the two-year limitation period for lock-in assessments under the Income Tax Act begins from the date of the last panchnama prepared during the search, not from the date of the last search authorization.
Anil Minda and Others v. Commissioner of Income Tax
The Supreme Court held that the two-year limitation period for block assessments under Section 158BE of the Income Tax Act starts from the date of the last Panchnama drawn, not the last search authorization.
State of Tripura v. Chandan Deb
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of Rule 3A(2) of the Tripura Sales Tax Rules, 1976 as a valid machinery provision for tax deduction at source on transfer of right to use goods, reversing the High Court's declaration of ultra vires.
The State of Tripura v. Chandan Deb
The Supreme Court upheld the validity of Rule 3A(2) of the Tripura Sales Tax Rules, 1976 as a valid machinery provision for tax deduction at source, reversing the High Court's declaration of ultra vires and affirming tax liability on transfer of right to use goods under the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976.
Anil Kumar v. State of Haryana
The Supreme Court held that parole periods granted under lawful authority do not count towards the total sentence period, dismissing the convict's petition challenging this exclusion.
Anil Kumar v. State of Haryana
The Supreme Court held that the period of temporary or emergency parole granted under statutory provisions does not count towards the total sentence period of a convict, dismissing the petition challenging this principle.
Mah. Adiwasi Thakur Jamat v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that the affinity test is not mandatory for every caste claim verification under Maharashtra law and is only to be conducted when documentary evidence is insufficient, affirming the quasi-judicial role of the Scrutiny Committee and emphasizing the probative value of pre-Constitution documents and valid caste certificates of blood relatives.
Hemantbhai Balvantbhai Patel v. The State of Gujarat
The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings in a family forgery dispute under Article 142, directing restitution to restore harmony.
Director General, Doordarshan Prasar Bharti Corporation of India & Anr. v. Magi H Desai
The Supreme Court held that casual/contractual service prior to regularisation does not qualify as temporary service under pension rules and cannot be counted for pension benefits absent explicit provision.
Director General, Doordarshan Prasar Bharati Corporation of India v. Megi H Desai
Contractual/part-time services rendered prior to regularization do not qualify as pensionable "kaamchalu" service under Rule 13 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972.
Director General, Doordarshan Prasar Bharti Corporation of India & Anr. v. Magi H Desai
The Supreme Court held that casual/contractual service prior to regularisation does not qualify as temporary service under pension rules and cannot be counted for pension benefits absent any statutory or scheme provision.
The State of Odisha v. Radheshyam Agrawal
The Supreme Court held that penalty cannot be levied while granting extension of time under a contract unless expressly authorized, and set aside the penalty imposed by the State on a delayed contractor.
The State of Odisha v. Radheshyam Agrawal
The Supreme Court held that penalty cannot be levied while granting extension of time to a contractor unless expressly authorized by contract or law, and upheld the High Court's setting aside of such penalty imposed by the State.