Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
National Highways Builders Federation v. Union of India
The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of the 18.08.2022 Office Memorandum clarifying that debarment of contractors under GFR 2017 can proceed without awaiting criminal case conclusion if sufficient material exists, dismissing the petition challenging it.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 v. M/S S.G. Portfolio Pvt. Ltd.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal, holding that reassessment without fresh material and without mandatory procedural compliance under the Income Tax Act, 1961 is invalid.
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7 v. M/S Sterling Agro Industries Ltd
The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal’s deletion of disallowance under Section 80IA(5), ruling that losses set off prior to the initial assessment year cannot be notionally carried forward against eligible business profits for deduction computation.
Bhupinder Singh & Anr. v. Lt Governor of Delhi & Ors.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking C&AG audit of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee and GHPS Society, holding that statutory remedies under the DSG Act must be exhausted and the C&AG cannot audit voluntary bodies without due process.
M/S GRAND SLAM FITNESS PVT LTD & ANR v. M/S OMSA INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES PVT LTD
The Delhi High Court held that objections to evidence beyond pleadings should be raised during trial and refused to strike off paragraphs of affidavit evidence prematurely.
M/S MANRAJ ENTERPRISES v. UNION OF INDIA
Delhi High Court appointed an independent sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act to adjudicate contractual disputes, clarifying the validity of panel appointments under Section 12(5).
Eshita Bashist v. The Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations & Anr.
The Delhi High Court directed conditional registration and examination of a student in a private unaided school upon payment of outstanding fees and condonation of attendance shortage by the Council.
M/S MANRAJ ENTERPRISES v. UNION OF INDIA
Delhi High Court appointed an independent sole arbitrator to adjudicate contractual disputes, clarifying procedural compliance under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
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.
SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELD LTD. & OTHERS v. GULSHAN PRAKASH
The Supreme Court remitted appeals concerning compassionate appointments under the NCWA to the High Court for expeditious merit-based disposal, while maintaining interim stay orders.
Meeta India Private Limited v. Mahendra Jain
The High Court erred in quashing a complaint under Section 138 NI Act filed by a company's authorized representative under a valid power of attorney, and the appeal restoring the complaint was allowed.
MITA INDIA PVT. LTD. v. MAHENDRA JAIN
The Supreme Court held that a complaint under Section 138 NI Act filed through a power of attorney holder with sub-delegated authority and personal knowledge is maintainable, restoring trial court orders and allowing the appeal.
Meeta India Private Limited v. Mahendra Jain
The High Court erred in quashing a complaint under Section 138 NI Act filed through an authorized power of attorney holder, and the appeal restoring the complaint proceedings was allowed.
MITA INDIA PVT. LTD. v. MAHENDRA JAIN
The Supreme Court held that a complaint under Section 138 NI Act filed through a duly authorised power of attorney holder who has personal knowledge of the transaction is maintainable, and sub-delegation of authority is valid if expressly permitted in the power of attorney.
Ramesh Chandra Sharma & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
The Supreme Court upheld the legality and constitutionality of differential compensation to 'Pukka' and 'Non-Pukka' landowners under land acquisition laws, dismissing challenges based on Article 14 and agreements executed by appellants.
Ramesh Chandra Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The Supreme Court struck down the differential compensation classification between Pushtaini and Gair-pushtaini landowners as violative of Article 14, holding that signing compensation agreements does not bar subsequent challenges to enhanced compensation.