Sale of Goods Act, 1930

Supreme Court settles taxability of credit notes for warranty replacements in automobile sales: M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (2023) INSC 469 (15 May 2023)

/ Ahsanuddin Amanullah, B.V. Nagarathna, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 2 (d), Judges, K.M. Joseph, Sale, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 12, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 4, Sales Tax Law, Sales Tax Law with Section 2(38)

Supreme Court Clarifies Tax on Warranty Replacements in Automobile Sales (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether credit notes issued by manufacturers to dealers for replacing defective auto parts under warranty are subject to sales tax. CASE TYPE: Sales Tax Law Case Name: M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes(SPL) & Anr. [Judgment Date]: […]

Supreme Court settles taxability of credit notes for warranty replacements in automobile sales: M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (2023) INSC 469 (15 May 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles tax liability on warranty replacements in automobile sales: Tata Motors vs. Deputy Commissioner (2023)

/ Ahsanuddin Amanullah, B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 12, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 4, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 59, Sales Tax Law, Sales Tax Law with Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, Sales Tax Law with Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994

Supreme Court Clarifies Tax on Warranty Replacements: Tata Motors vs. Deputy Commissioner (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether credit notes issued by manufacturers to dealers for warranty replacements are subject to sales tax. CASE TYPE: Sales Tax Law Case Name: M/S. TATA MOTORS LTD. vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES(SPL) & ANR. [Judgment Date]: 15 May

Supreme Court settles tax liability on warranty replacements in automobile sales: Tata Motors vs. Deputy Commissioner (2023) Read Post »

Pre-Existing Dispute Under IBC: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Corporate Debtor in Rajratan Babulal Agarwal vs. Solartex India Pvt. Ltd. (2022)

/ Hrishikesh Roy, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 9, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Pre-Existing Dispute, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 13, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 59

Supreme Court on Pre-Existing Dispute under IBC: Rajratan Babulal Agarwal vs. Solartex India Pvt. Ltd. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a ‘pre-existing dispute’ existed to reject an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). CASE TYPE: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Law Case Name: Rajratan Babulal Agarwal vs. Solartex India Pvt. Ltd. &

Pre-Existing Dispute Under IBC: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Corporate Debtor in Rajratan Babulal Agarwal vs. Solartex India Pvt. Ltd. (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Holds Automaker Liable for Defective Airbags in Consumer Case: Hyundai Motor India Ltd. vs. Shailendra Bhatnagar (20 April 2022)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 14, Consumer Rights, Implied Conditions, Judges, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 16, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Holds Automaker Liable for Defective Airbags in Hyundai Motor India Ltd. vs. Shailendra Bhatnagar (2022) Date of the Judgment: 20 April 2022 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 3001 of 2022 (Arising out of Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 4881 of 2021) Judges: Justice Vineet Saran and Justice Aniruddha Bose Can a

Supreme Court Holds Automaker Liable for Defective Airbags in Consumer Case: Hyundai Motor India Ltd. vs. Shailendra Bhatnagar (20 April 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Competition Commission in Lottery Tender Case: Competition Commission of India vs. State of Mizoram & Ors. (2022) INSC 31

/ Anti-Competitive Agreements, Competition Act, 2002, Competition Act, 2002 with Section 3, Competition Act, 2002 with Section 4, Definition of Goods, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 2(7), Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Competition Commission in Lottery Tender Case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has jurisdiction to investigate allegations of bid rigging and cartelization in the tender process for appointment of lottery distributors, specifically when lotteries are considered ‘res extra commercium’. CASE TYPE: Competition Law, Tender Process, Lottery Regulation

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Competition Commission in Lottery Tender Case: Competition Commission of India vs. State of Mizoram & Ors. (2022) INSC 31 Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies “Owner” Definition in Motor Vehicle Insurance Claims: Surendra Kumar Bhilawe vs. New India Assurance Company Limited (2020)

/ Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 10, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 157, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 2(30), Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 50, R. Banumathi, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 19, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 20

Supreme Court Clarifies “Owner” Definition in Motor Vehicle Insurance Claims: Surendra Kumar Bhilawe vs. New India Assurance Company Limited (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “owner” under Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in the context of insurance claims. CASE TYPE: Motor Vehicle Insurance/Consumer Dispute Case Name: Surendra Kumar Bhilawe vs. The New India

Supreme Court Clarifies “Owner” Definition in Motor Vehicle Insurance Claims: Surendra Kumar Bhilawe vs. New India Assurance Company Limited (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Inter-State Sales Tax: No Time Limit on Delivery for Section 6(2) Benefit in Commercial Taxes Officer vs. Bombay Machinery Store (27 April 2020)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 with Section 3, Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 with Section 6, Deepak Gupta, Judges, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 51

Supreme Court on Inter-State Sales Tax and Delivery Timeframes: Commercial Taxes Officer vs. Bombay Machinery Store (2020) Date of the Judgment: 27 April 2020 Citation: 2020 INSC 347 Judges: Deepak Gupta, J., Aniruddha Bose, J. Can tax authorities impose a time limit on the delivery of goods for availing tax exemptions on inter-state sales? The

Supreme Court clarifies Inter-State Sales Tax: No Time Limit on Delivery for Section 6(2) Benefit in Commercial Taxes Officer vs. Bombay Machinery Store (27 April 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles if Dharmada is part of Transaction Value in Central Excise Cases (9 April 2019)

/ Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 4, Deepak Gupta, Judges, S.A. Bobde, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 2(h), Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 4, Transaction Value, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Clarifies: Dharmada is Not Part of Transaction Value in Excise Duty Cases (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Dharmada, a voluntary charitable donation, is part of the transaction value for excise duty calculation. CASE TYPE: Central Excise Case Name: M/s D.J. Malpani vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik Judgment Date: 9 April 2019 Introduction Date

Supreme Court settles if Dharmada is part of Transaction Value in Central Excise Cases (9 April 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Market Fee Liability on Agricultural Produce: Arihant Udhyog vs. State of Rajasthan (2017)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Judges, Market Fees, Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1963, Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961, Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 with Section 17, Sale and agreement to sell, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 19, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 4

LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of when a sale of goods is considered to have taken place within a market area for the purpose of levying market fees. CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Agricultural Market Regulation Case Name: M/s. Arihant Udhyog vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Judgment Date: June 9, 2017 Date of the Judgment: June 9,

Supreme Court Clarifies Market Fee Liability on Agricultural Produce: Arihant Udhyog vs. State of Rajasthan (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies tax liability of clubs supplying goods to members in sales tax cases: Cosmopolitan Club vs. State of Tamil Nadu (25 September 2008)

/ B. Sudershan Reddy, Companies Act, Companies Act with Section 26, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with 46th Amendment, Judges, S.H. Kapadia, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sales Tax, Sales Tax with Section 2(n), Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959

Date of the Judgment: 25 September 2008 Judges: S.H. Kapadia, B. Sudershan Reddy The Supreme Court addressed the question of whether clubs are liable to pay sales tax on the supply of food and drinks to their members. The core issue revolves around whether such supplies constitute a ‘sale’ under the Tamil Nadu General Sales

Supreme Court clarifies tax liability of clubs supplying goods to members in sales tax cases: Cosmopolitan Club vs. State of Tamil Nadu (25 September 2008) Read Post »

Scroll to Top