Companies Act, 1956

Supreme Court Upholds 9% Interest on Share Sale in Company Dispute: Vinod Krishan Khanna & Ors. vs. Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills Private Limited (23 February 2021)

/ Appellate Review, B.R. Gavai, Civil Procedure, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 397, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 398, Equity, Judges, Oppression and Mismanagement, Principles of Equity, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Suo Moto Powers, Unjust Enrichment

Supreme Court Upholds 9% Interest on Share Sale in Company Dispute: Vinod Krishan Khanna & Ors. vs. Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills Private Limited (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) was correct in reducing the interest rate awarded by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on the sale of shares in […]

Supreme Court Upholds 9% Interest on Share Sale in Company Dispute: Vinod Krishan Khanna & Ors. vs. Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills Private Limited (23 February 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition in Family Business Dispute: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang (2021)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, B.R. Gavai, Civil Contempt, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 397, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 139-A, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with Section 2(b), Judges, Oppression and Mismanagement

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition in Family Business Dispute: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the respondents’ actions constituted contempt of court for violating a prior consent order, despite subsequent orders from the Company Law Board (CLB). CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court, Family Business Dispute Case Name: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition in Family Business Dispute: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles Section 80-IA deduction eligibility for a company succeeding a partnership in infrastructure projects: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Chetak Enterprises (2020) INSC 179 (05 March 2020)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 575, Dinesh Maheshwari, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 80-IA, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Section 80-IA Deduction for Company Succeeding Partnership in Infrastructure Project Date of the Judgment: 05 March 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 179 Judges: A.M. Khanwilkar, J., Dinesh Maheshwari, J. Can a company claim tax deductions under Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for an infrastructure project when it has taken over

Supreme Court settles Section 80-IA deduction eligibility for a company succeeding a partnership in infrastructure projects: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Chetak Enterprises (2020) INSC 179 (05 March 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tax on Share Buybacks: Genpact India vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (22 November 2019)

/ Assessment and Appeals, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 391, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 77A, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 115QA, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 246A, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Upholds Tax on Share Buybacks: Genpact India vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a company is liable to pay additional income tax on buyback of shares under Section 115QA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, even when the buyback is part of a scheme of arrangement approved by the

Supreme Court Upholds Tax on Share Buybacks: Genpact India vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (22 November 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Revives Winding Up Proceedings and Denies Sale Deed: IDBI Bank vs. Official Liquidator (2019)

/ Advertising Winding Up Petitions, Ajay Rastogi, Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 with Rule 101, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 293(1), Companies Act, 1956 with Section 531, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Winding Up

Supreme Court Revives Winding Up Proceedings and Denies Sale Deed: IDBI Bank vs. Official Liquidator (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether winding up proceedings should be revived and whether a sale deed can be executed based on an agreement to sell. CASE TYPE: Company Law, Insolvency Case Name: IDBI Bank Limited vs. The Official Liquidator, Office of

Supreme Court Revives Winding Up Proceedings and Denies Sale Deed: IDBI Bank vs. Official Liquidator (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Company’s Right to Recover Property from Ex-Director: Hooghly Mills Company Ltd. vs. State of West Bengal (2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 630, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 with Section 482, Inherent Powers of High Court, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Specific Relief Act, 1963, Specific Relief Act, 1963 with Section 41, Wrongful Withholding of Property

Supreme Court Upholds Company’s Right to Recover Property from Ex-Director: Hooghly Mills Company Ltd. vs. State of West Bengal (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a company can recover property from a former director under Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956, even if a civil suit regarding the same property is pending. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case

Supreme Court Upholds Company’s Right to Recover Property from Ex-Director: Hooghly Mills Company Ltd. vs. State of West Bengal (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Taxability of Members’ Clubs Post 46th Amendment: State of West Bengal vs. Calcutta Club Limited (2019)

/ Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 25, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 366, Constitutional Law with Article 366(29-A), Finance Act, 1994, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 2(d), Judges, R.F. Nariman, Surya Kant, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Clarifies Taxability of Members’ Clubs Post 46th Amendment: State of West Bengal vs. Calcutta Club Limited (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of the doctrine of mutuality to incorporated clubs regarding sales tax and service tax after the 46th Amendment to the Constitution of India. CASE TYPE: Tax Law (Sales Tax and Service Tax) Case

Supreme Court Clarifies Taxability of Members’ Clubs Post 46th Amendment: State of West Bengal vs. Calcutta Club Limited (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Sets Aside Winding Up Order Due to Limitation: Jignesh Shah vs. Union of India (25 September 2019)

/ Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 433, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 434, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 238A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Article 137, R. Subhash Reddy, R.F. Nariman, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Sets Aside Winding Up Order Due to Limitation: Jignesh Shah vs. Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a winding-up petition filed under the Companies Act, 1956, which is time-barred, can be revived as a Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Jignesh Shah

Supreme Court Sets Aside Winding Up Order Due to Limitation: Jignesh Shah vs. Union of India (25 September 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles assessment order validity when issued to a non-existent company in tax cases: PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki (25 July 2019)

/ Amalgamation of Companies, Assessment Proceedings, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 394, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 143(2), Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 292B, Indira Banerjee, Judges

Supreme Court on Assessment Order in the Name of Non-Existent Company: PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an assessment order issued in the name of an amalgamated company, which ceased to exist, is valid under the Income Tax Act, 1961. CASE TYPE: Income Tax Law Case Name: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, New

Supreme Court settles assessment order validity when issued to a non-existent company in tax cases: PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki (25 July 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Invalidates Compulsory Amalgamation under Section 396 of the Companies Act: 63 Moons Technologies Ltd. vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 441

/ Amalgamation, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 396, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Invalidates Compulsory Amalgamation under Section 396 of the Companies Act: 63 Moons Technologies Ltd. vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 441 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a compulsory amalgamation order under Section 396 of the Companies Act, 1956, is valid when it does not adequately compensate the transferor company and its shareholders, and when the

Supreme Court Invalidates Compulsory Amalgamation under Section 396 of the Companies Act: 63 Moons Technologies Ltd. vs. Union of India (2019) INSC 441 Read Post »

Supreme Court on Dismissal of Income Tax Appeal due to Company Dissolution: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Gopal Shri Scrips Pvt. Ltd. (2019) INSC 197

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Chapter XV of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 560(5), Dinesh Maheshwari, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 260A, Judges

Supreme Court on Dismissal of Income Tax Appeal due to Company Dissolution: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Gopal Shri Scrips Pvt. Ltd. (2019) INSC 197 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an appeal filed by the Income Tax Department can be dismissed as infructuous solely because the respondent company has been dissolved. CASE TYPE: Income Tax Law

Supreme Court on Dismissal of Income Tax Appeal due to Company Dissolution: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Gopal Shri Scrips Pvt. Ltd. (2019) INSC 197 Read Post »

Scroll to Top