Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Assessment Procedures for Charitable Trusts: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (2022)

/ Charitable Trusts, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 2(15), Judges, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, S. Ravindra Bhat, Tax Assessment, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Assessment Procedures for Charitable Trusts: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Clarification on the application of the Supreme Court’s judgment regarding Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning charitable trusts and general public utility. CASE TYPE: Income Tax Law Case Name: Assistant Commissioner […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Assessment Procedures for Charitable Trusts: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition Due to Delay in D. Laxmamma vs. S. Halappa (1 November 2022)

/ Civil Law, Delay in filing, Judges, Limitation Act, Review Petition, Sanjiv Khanna, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in D. Laxmamma vs. S. Halappa LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a review petition can be dismissed due to an unreasonable delay in filing. CASE TYPE: Civil. Case Name: D. Laxmamma vs. S. Halappa and Ors. Judgment Date: 1 November 2022. Introduction Date of the Judgment: 1 November 2022 Citation: Not Available

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition Due to Delay in D. Laxmamma vs. S. Halappa (1 November 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the overriding effect of the MSMED Act, 2006 on the Arbitration Act, 1996 in disputes: Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. vs. Mahakali Foods Pvt. Ltd. (31 October 2022)

/ Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 7, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 80, Bela M. Trivedi, Dispute Resolution under MSMED Act, Judges, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, MSMED Act with Section 18, MSMED Act with Section 24, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies MSMED Act’s Overriding Effect on Arbitration Act in Disputes: Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. vs. Mahakali Foods Pvt. Ltd. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act) override the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when there is an

Supreme Court settles the overriding effect of the MSMED Act, 2006 on the Arbitration Act, 1996 in disputes: Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. vs. Mahakali Foods Pvt. Ltd. (31 October 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Defamation Liability for Editors in News Publications: Aroon Purie vs. State of NCT of Delhi (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Defamation, Editor, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 499, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 500, Judges, Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 with Section 7, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Defamation Liability for Editors in News Publications: Aroon Purie vs. State of NCT of Delhi (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the extent of liability for defamation of an Editor-in-Chief of a news publication. CASE TYPE: Criminal Defamation Case Name: Aroon Purie vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors. Judgment Date: 31 October

Supreme Court Clarifies Defamation Liability for Editors in News Publications: Aroon Purie vs. State of NCT of Delhi (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the definition of “proceeds of crime” under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in bribery cases: Directorate of Enforcement vs. Padmanabhan Kishore (31 October 2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Judges, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 7, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 with Section 2(1)(u), Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 with Section 3, Proceeds of Crime, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Money Laundering Act in Bribery Cases LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a bribe giver can be prosecuted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) for being involved in the process or activity connected with “proceeds of crime” even before the bribe is received by the public servant. CASE TYPE: Criminal

Supreme Court clarifies the definition of “proceeds of crime” under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in bribery cases: Directorate of Enforcement vs. Padmanabhan Kishore (31 October 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court directs fresh bail consideration on medical grounds in PMLA case: Chander Prakash Wadhwa vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (22 October 2022)

/ Bail, Bail under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Bela M. Trivedi, Criminal Law, Judges, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court directs fresh bail consideration on medical grounds in PMLA case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a fresh bail application can be considered by the Trial Court based on a petitioner’s medical condition after a previous rejection. CASE TYPE: Criminal (Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002) Case Name: Chander Prakash Wadhwa vs. State (NCT of Delhi)

Supreme Court directs fresh bail consideration on medical grounds in PMLA case: Chander Prakash Wadhwa vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (22 October 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in POCSO Case: Mohd. Firoz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (21 October 2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 376, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 376A, Judges, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 with Section 5, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 with Section 6, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in POCSO Case: Mohd. Firoz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Modification of sentence in cases involving offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO). CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, POCSO Act Case Name: Mohd. Firoz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in POCSO Case: Mohd. Firoz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (21 October 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court modifies sentence in POCSO case: Mohd. Firoz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022)

/ Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault, Bela M. Trivedi, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 376A, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 with Section 6, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court modifies sentence in POCSO case: Mohd. Firoz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) Date of the Judgment: 21 October 2022 Citation: Review Petition (Criminal) No. 282 of 2022 in Criminal Appeal No. 612 of 2019 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI, S. Ravindra Bhat, J., Bela M. Trivedi, J. Can a court modify a

Supreme Court modifies sentence in POCSO case: Mohd. Firoz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Arbitration Despite Unstamped Agreements: Weatherford vs. Baker Hughes (20 October 2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 16, Arbitration Law, Bela M. Trivedi, Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements, Judges, Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958, Payment of Stamp Duty, Separability of Arbitration Agreement, Stamp Duty, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Allows Arbitration Despite Unstamped Agreements: Weatherford vs. Baker Hughes (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitration agreement within an unstamped contract is enforceable. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Weatherford Oil Tool Middle East Limited vs. Baker Hughes Singapore PTE & Other connected matters. Judgment Date: 20 October 2022 Date of the Judgment: 20

Supreme Court Allows Arbitration Despite Unstamped Agreements: Weatherford vs. Baker Hughes (20 October 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies “Charitable Purpose” under Section 2(15) of Income Tax Act, 1961: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (2022)

/ Charitable Purpose, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 11, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 2(15), Judges, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies “Charitable Purpose” under Section 2(15) of Income Tax Act, 1961 Date of the Judgment: 19 October 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 900 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI, S. Ravindra Bhat, J, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. Can organizations involved in activities that generate revenue, such as trade or business, still be considered charities for

Supreme Court Clarifies “Charitable Purpose” under Section 2(15) of Income Tax Act, 1961: Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies “Solely for Educational Purposes” Under Income Tax Act: New Noble Educational Society vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (2022)

/ Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987, Charitable Trusts, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Seventh Schedule, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 10(23C), Interpretation of Statutes, Judges, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Registration of Charitable Institutions, S. Ravindra Bhat, Tax Exemptions, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies “Solely for Educational Purposes” Under Income Tax Act LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “solely for educational purposes” for tax exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. CASE TYPE: Income Tax, Charitable Trusts, Educational Institutions Case Name: M/s New Noble Educational Society vs. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Judgment Date:

Supreme Court Clarifies “Solely for Educational Purposes” Under Income Tax Act: New Noble Educational Society vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Cooperative Society’s Right to Redevelop Property: Bengal Secretariat Cooperative Land Mortgage Bank vs. Aloke Kumar (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Cooperative Law, Cooperative Society Autonomy, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit, West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006 with Section 28, West Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, 2011 with Rule 21

Supreme Court Upholds Cooperative Society’s Right to Redevelop Property: Bengal Secretariat Cooperative Land Mortgage Bank vs. Aloke Kumar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a cooperative society can engage a third-party developer for property redevelopment. CASE TYPE: Cooperative Law, Property Law Case Name: The Bengal Secretariat Cooperative Land Mortgage Bank and Housing Society Ltd. vs. Sri Aloke

Supreme Court Upholds Cooperative Society’s Right to Redevelop Property: Bengal Secretariat Cooperative Land Mortgage Bank vs. Aloke Kumar (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top