Hrishikesh Roy

Supreme Court Clarifies Deductibility of Fees and Taxes for State-Owned Liquor Corporation: Kerala State Beverages vs. ACIT (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 289, Hrishikesh Roy, Income-tax Act, 1961, Income-tax Act, 1961 with Section 143(3), Income-tax Act, 1961 with Section 40, Income-tax Act, 1961 with Section 40(a)(iib), Judges, R. Subhash Reddy

Supreme Court Clarifies Deductibility of Fees and Taxes for State-Owned Liquor Corporation: Kerala State Beverages vs. ACIT (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether certain fees and taxes paid by a state-owned corporation are deductible expenses under Section 40(a)(iib) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. CASE TYPE: Income Tax Law Case Name: Kerala State Beverages Manufacturing & Marketing Corporation […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Deductibility of Fees and Taxes for State-Owned Liquor Corporation: Kerala State Beverages vs. ACIT (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Section 40(a)(iib) of Income Tax Act: Kerala State Beverages vs. ACIT (2022)

/ Amounts Not Deductible, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 289, Hrishikesh Roy, Income-tax Act, 1961, Income-tax Act, 1961 with Section 40, Income-tax Act, 1961 with Section 40(a)(iib), Judges, R. Subhash Reddy

Supreme Court clarifies Section 40(a)(iib) of Income Tax Act: Kerala State Beverages vs. ACIT (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 03, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 4 Judges: R. Subhash Reddy, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can a state government undertaking claim deductions for fees paid to the state? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this

Supreme Court clarifies Section 40(a)(iib) of Income Tax Act: Kerala State Beverages vs. ACIT (2022) Read Post »

Assured Career Progression Scheme: Supreme Court clarifies eligibility for employees refusing promotions in Union of India vs. Manju Arora (2022)

/ Approbate and Reprobate, Assured Career Progression Scheme, Doctrine, Financial Upgradation, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Office Memorandum, Office Memorandum with 18.7.2001, Office Memorandum with 9.8.1999, Promotion, R. Subhash Reddy, Service Law

Supreme Court clarifies Assured Career Progression Scheme: Union of India vs. Manju Arora (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether employees who refuse promotions are eligible for financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Union of India & Ors. vs. Manju Arora & Anr. Judgment Date: 3 January 2022 Introduction

Assured Career Progression Scheme: Supreme Court clarifies eligibility for employees refusing promotions in Union of India vs. Manju Arora (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Deductibility of State Levies Under Section 40(a)(iib) of Income Tax Act: Kerala State Beverages vs. ACIT (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 289, Hrishikesh Roy, Income-tax Act, 1961, Income-tax Act, 1961 with Section 143(3), Income-tax Act, 1961 with Section 40, Income-tax Act, 1961 with Section 40(a)(iib), Judges, R. Subhash Reddy

Supreme Court Clarifies Deductibility of State Levies Under Section 40(a)(iib) of Income Tax Act: Kerala State Beverages vs. ACIT (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 03, 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 1 Judges: R. Subhash Reddy, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can a state-owned corporation deduct payments made to the state government, such as license fees and

Supreme Court Clarifies Deductibility of State Levies Under Section 40(a)(iib) of Income Tax Act: Kerala State Beverages vs. ACIT (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 34(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: I-Pay Clearing Services vs. ICICI Bank (2022)

/ Arbitral Award, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, R. Subhash Reddy, Recourse Against Arbitral Award

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 34(4) of the Arbitration Act in I-Pay Clearing Services vs. ICICI Bank (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 3, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 1 Judges: R. Subhash Reddy, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can a court send an arbitration award back to the arbitrator for clarification if the award

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 34(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: I-Pay Clearing Services vs. ICICI Bank (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds RBI’s Authority in Bond Dispute: SIDBI vs. Sibco Investment (2022)

/ Banking Regulation Act, 1949, Banking Regulation Act, 1949 with Section 35-A, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 441(2), Companies Act, 1956 with Section 531, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, R. Subhash Reddy, Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 with Section 45-JA, Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 with Section 45-MB

Supreme Court Upholds RBI’s Authority in Bond Dispute: SIDBI vs. Sibco Investment (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) directives regarding the transfer of bonds are binding on financial institutions. CASE TYPE: Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, Banking Law. Case Name: Small Industries Development Bank of India vs. M/s. Sibco Investment Pvt. Ltd. Judgment

Supreme Court Upholds RBI’s Authority in Bond Dispute: SIDBI vs. Sibco Investment (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court reduces sentence in culpable homicide case arising from property dispute: Govindan vs. State (2021)

/ Culpable Homicide, Hrishikesh Roy, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 304, Judges, R. Subhash Reddy

Supreme Court Reduces Sentence in Culpable Homicide Case: Govindan vs. State (2021) Date of the Judgment: December 17, 2021 Citation: 2021 INSC 735 Judges: R. Subhash Reddy, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can a sentence for culpable homicide be reduced when the act occurred during a sudden quarrel and in the exercise of the right to

Supreme Court reduces sentence in culpable homicide case arising from property dispute: Govindan vs. State (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court dismisses contempt petition in land acquisition case: Soorajmull Nagarmull vs. Brijesh Mehrotra (2021)

/ Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Land Acquisition Law, Land Acquisition Law with Section 11, Land Acquisition Law with Section 64, R. Subhash Reddy, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

Supreme Court dismisses contempt petition in land acquisition case: Soorajmull Nagarmull vs. Brijesh Mehrotra (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the respondents wilfully violated the Supreme Court’s directions regarding land acquisition compensation. CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court / Land Acquisition Case Name: M/s. Soorajmull Nagarmull vs. Sri Brijesh Mehrotra & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 14 December 2021 Introduction

Supreme Court dismisses contempt petition in land acquisition case: Soorajmull Nagarmull vs. Brijesh Mehrotra (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Overturns High Court Order on Temporary Status for Casual Laborers: BSNL vs. Deo Kumar Rai (2021)

/ Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 with Section 22(3), Casual Labourers, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, R. Subhash Reddy, Regularization, Service Law, Temporary Status

Supreme Court Overturns High Court Order on Temporary Status for Casual Laborers: BSNL vs. Deo Kumar Rai (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a casual laborer is entitled to temporary status under the Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme of the Department of Telecommunications, 1989, if they have not worked for 240 days in

Supreme Court Overturns High Court Order on Temporary Status for Casual Laborers: BSNL vs. Deo Kumar Rai (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes dowry harassment charges against in-laws due to lack of specific evidence: Mirza Iqbal vs. State of UP (2021)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 482, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 with Section 3, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 with Section 4, Hrishikesh Roy, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 304B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498A, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, R. Subhash Reddy

Supreme Court quashes dowry harassment charges against in-laws due to lack of specific evidence: Mirza Iqbal vs. State of UP (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether charges of dowry harassment and murder can be sustained against in-laws based on vague and omnibus allegations without specific evidence of their involvement. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Dowry Harassment Case Name:

Supreme Court quashes dowry harassment charges against in-laws due to lack of specific evidence: Mirza Iqbal vs. State of UP (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Cancellation of Sale Deed: Amudhavali vs. P. Rukumani (2021)

/ Cancellation Deeds, Civil Law, Civil Suit, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Property Law, R. Subhash Reddy, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with provisions concerning registration of documents, Registration of Deeds

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Cancellation of Sale Deed: Amudhavali vs. P. Rukumani (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a registered sale deed can be unilaterally cancelled by the seller. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Property Dispute Case Name: Amudhavali & Ors. vs. P. Rukumani & Ors. Judgment Date: 7 December 2021 Introduction Date of

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Cancellation of Sale Deed: Amudhavali vs. P. Rukumani (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Custodial Escape Case: Parveen @ Sonu vs. State of Haryana (2021)

/ Arms Act, Arms Act with Section 25, Constitutional Law, Hrishikesh Roy, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, R. Subhash Reddy

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Custodial Escape Case: Parveen @ Sonu vs. State of Haryana (2021) Date of the Judgment: December 7, 2021 Citation: 2021 INSC 744 Judges: R. Subhash Reddy, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can a person be convicted of conspiracy based solely on the confessional statements of co-accused, without any other corroborating evidence?

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Custodial Escape Case: Parveen @ Sonu vs. State of Haryana (2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top