Judges

Supreme Court clarifies total turnover under Section 10A of IT Act: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. HCL Technologies Ltd. (24 April 2018)

/ Export Turnover, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 10A, Judges, R. Banumathi, R.K. Agrawal, Total Turnover

Supreme Court clarifies total turnover under Section 10A of IT Act: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. HCL Technologies Ltd. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether software development charges should be excluded while calculating deductions under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. CASE TYPE: Income Tax Case Name: Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-III vs. HCL Technologies […]

Supreme Court clarifies total turnover under Section 10A of IT Act: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. HCL Technologies Ltd. (24 April 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Status of Elected Members in No-Confidence Motion: Ram Pal Singh vs. State of U.P. (24 April 2018)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 188, Deepak Gupta, Judges, Madan B. Lokur, Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961, Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961 with Section 15, Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961 with Section 6(1)

Supreme Court Clarifies Status of Elected Members in No-Confidence Motion: Ram Pal Singh vs. State of U.P. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an elected member of a Kshettra Panchayat, who has not subscribed to the oath of office, can sign or move a no-confidence motion against the Pramukh of the Kshettra Panchayat. CASE TYPE: Local Government

Supreme Court Clarifies Status of Elected Members in No-Confidence Motion: Ram Pal Singh vs. State of U.P. (24 April 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Taxability of Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs) in Income Tax Act: Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharat V. Patel (24 April 2018)

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 17(2), Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 28(iv), Judges, Perquisites, R.K. Agrawal

Supreme Court Clarifies Taxability of Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs) in Income Tax Act: Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharat V. Patel (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the amount received on redemption of Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs) is taxable as a perquisite or as capital gains under the Income Tax Act, 1961. CASE TYPE: Income Tax

Supreme Court Clarifies Taxability of Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs) in Income Tax Act: Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharat V. Patel (24 April 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Grants Career Advancement Benefits to Employees: State of West Bengal vs. West Bengal Dairymens Association (2018)

/ Career Advancement Scheme, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Merger Benefits, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Navin Sinha, Service Law

Supreme Court Grants Career Advancement Benefits to Employees: State of West Bengal vs. West Bengal Dairymens Association (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether employees of merged directorates are entitled to Career Advancement Scheme benefits despite receiving benefits under the merger scheme. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The State of West Bengal vs. West Bengal Dairymens Association

Supreme Court Grants Career Advancement Benefits to Employees: State of West Bengal vs. West Bengal Dairymens Association (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles deduction of lease equalization charges in income tax: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. (24 April 2018)

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 211, Deductions Under Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 145, Judges, R.K. Agrawal

Supreme Court Allows Lease Equalization Charges Deduction: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether lease equalization charges can be deducted from lease rental income under the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on a Guidance Note issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI). CASE TYPE: Income Tax

Supreme Court settles deduction of lease equalization charges in income tax: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. (24 April 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles retrospective applicability of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act in Tax Deduction Cases (24 April 2018)

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 139, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 40(a)(ia), Judges, R.K. Agrawal, Tax Deducted at Source (TDS)

Supreme Court Clarifies Retrospective Application of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act in Tax Deduction Cases LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Finance Act, 2010, has retrospective application. CASE TYPE: Income Tax Law Case Name: Commissioner of Income Tax Kolkata XII vs. M/s Calcutta

Supreme Court settles retrospective applicability of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act in Tax Deduction Cases (24 April 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the applicability of Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act in compensation cases: Ramsingbhai vs. State of Gujarat (24 April 2018)

/ Judges, Kurian Joseph, Land Acquisition, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 28A, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Navin Sinha, Reference Court

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act: Ramsingbhai vs. State of Gujarat (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an application for redetermination of compensation under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 can be filed based on a High Court or Supreme Court judgment passed in appeal. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case

Supreme Court clarifies the applicability of Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act in compensation cases: Ramsingbhai vs. State of Gujarat (24 April 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies the Scope of Section 366 IPC in Abduction Cases: Kavita Chandrakant Lakhani vs. State of Maharashtra (24 April 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 363, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 366, Judges, Offences Relating to Marriage, R.K. Agrawal

Supreme Court Clarifies the Scope of Section 366 IPC in Abduction Cases: Kavita Chandrakant Lakhani vs. State of Maharashtra (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the act of forcibly taking a woman to a place constitutes abduction with the intent to compel marriage or illicit intercourse under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Clarifies the Scope of Section 366 IPC in Abduction Cases: Kavita Chandrakant Lakhani vs. State of Maharashtra (24 April 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Food Adulteration Laws: Delhi Administration vs. Vidya Gupta (2018)

/ Criminal Appeal, Criminal Law, Food Adulteration, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 with Section 13, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 with Section 7, S.A. Bobde

Supreme Court Clarifies Food Adulteration Laws: Delhi Administration vs. Vidya Gupta (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether storing adulterated food for use as an ingredient is an offense under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. CASE TYPE: Criminal – Food Adulteration Case Name: Delhi Administration vs. Vidya Gupta Judgment Date: 24 April 2018 Date of the

Supreme Court Clarifies Food Adulteration Laws: Delhi Administration vs. Vidya Gupta (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court remits land acquisition compensation matter to High Court: Harvinder Singh vs. State of Haryana (2018)

/ Compensation, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Land Acquisition Law, Land Acquisition Law with Fair Compensation, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court remits land acquisition compensation matter to High Court: Harvinder Singh vs. State of Haryana (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the compensation awarded in a land acquisition case was appropriate. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Harvinder Singh vs. State of Haryana & Ors. [Judgment Date]: April 23, 2018 Date of the Judgment: April 23,

Supreme Court remits land acquisition compensation matter to High Court: Harvinder Singh vs. State of Haryana (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the status of Field Supervisors as Teachers: Registrar, Orissa University of Agriculture & Technology vs. Upendra Nath Patra & Anr. (23 April 2018)

/ Employee Rights, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Orissa University of Agriculture and Technology Act, 1965, Orissa University of Agriculture and Technology Act, 1965 with Section 2(10), S.A. Bobde, Service Law, Statutes of the Orissa University of Agriculture and Technology, 1966 with Statute 19

Supreme Court Clarifies Teacher Status of Field Supervisors in Orissa University of Agriculture & Technology Date of the Judgment: 23 April 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 327 Judges: S.A. Bobde, J., L. Nageswara Rao, J. Can a university employee, specifically a Field Supervisor, be considered a teacher and be entitled to the benefits of a teacher?

Supreme Court clarifies the status of Field Supervisors as Teachers: Registrar, Orissa University of Agriculture & Technology vs. Upendra Nath Patra & Anr. (23 April 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies promotion criteria for medical professors: Dr. Shadab Ahmed Khan vs. Prof. Mujahid Beg (2018)

/ Career Advancement Scheme, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, MCI Regulations, Medical Council Act, 1956, S.A. Bobde, Service Law, UGC Regulations, University Faculty Promotion, University Grants Commission Act, 1956

Supreme Court clarifies promotion criteria for medical professors: Dr. Shadab Ahmed Khan vs. Prof. Mujahid Beg (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Ph.D. degree is mandatory for promotion to the post of Professor under the Career Advancement Scheme in medical colleges. CASE TYPE: Service Law (University Faculty Promotion) Case Name: Dr. Shadab Ahmed Khan & Anr.

Supreme Court clarifies promotion criteria for medical professors: Dr. Shadab Ahmed Khan vs. Prof. Mujahid Beg (2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top