Category: Supreme Court

Archive for the ‘Supreme Court’ Category


COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: August 21, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

The scheme of settlement does not contemplate revision of the income so disclosed in the application. If an assessee is permitted to revise his disclosure, in essence, he would be making a fresh application in relation to the same case by withdrawing the earlier application. S. 245C (3) prohibits the withdrawal of an application. An assessee cannot be permitted to resile from his stand at any stage during the proceedings. By revising the application, the applicant would be achieving something indirectly what he cannot otherwise achieve directly and in the process rendering s. 245 (3) otiose and meaningless. As there is no stipulation for revision of an application filed u/s 245C(1), the natural corollary is that determination of income by the Settlement Commission has necessarily to be with reference to the income disclosed in the application

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: August 14, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

On the larger issue of whether criticism of a judicial body amount to contempt, fair criticism of the system of administration of justice or functioning of institutions or authorities entrusted with the task of deciding rights of the parties gives an opportunity to the operators of the system/institution to remedy the wrong and also bring about improvements. Such criticism cannot be castigated as an attempt to scandalize or lower the authority of the Court or other judicial institutions or as an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice except when such criticism is ill motivated or is construed as a deliberate attempt to run down the institution or an individual Judge is targeted for extraneous reasons. Ordinarily, the Court would not use the power to punish for contempt for curbing the right of freedom of speech and expression, which is guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Only when the criticism of judicial institutions transgresses all limits of decency and fairness or there is total lack of objectivity or there is deliberate attempt to denigrate the institution then the Court would use this power

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: August 11, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Unless malafides are writ large on the conduct of the party, generally as a normal rule, delay should be condoned. In the legal arena, an attempt should always be made to allow the matter to be contested on merits rather than to throw it on such technicalities. Apart from the above, the appellant would not have gained in any manner whatsoever, by not filing the appeal within the period of limitation. It is also worth noticing that delay was also not that huge, which could not have been condoned, without putting the respondents to harm or prejudice. It is the duty of the Court to see to it that justice should be done between the parties

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 29, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

In addition to normal mode of service, service of Notice(s) may be effected by E-Mail for which the advocate(s) on-record will, at the time of filing of petition/appeal, furnish to the filing counter a soft copy of the entire petition/appeal in PDF format

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 6, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

S. 94(7) was inserted w.e.f. 1.4.2002 to curb claim of such loss. However, the effect of s. 94(7) is that only losses to extent of dividend have to be ignored by the AO and not the entire loss. Losses over and above the dividend are still allowable even after s. 94(7). This shows that Parliament has not treated the dividend stripping transaction as sham or bogus or the entire loss as a fictitious or fiscal loss. If the argument of the Department is to be accepted, it would mean that before 1.4.2002 the entire loss would be disallowed as not genuine but, after 1.4.2002, a part of it would be allowable u/s 94(7) which can never be the object of s. 94(7)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: June 25, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

The argument that because the information held by ITAT is in the form of only judicial record, such record is outside the purview of the RTI Act is not acceptable. Even the Supreme Court and High Courts have rules for disclosure of judicial information. The only requirement is that applicant must adhere to the particular rules in making an application under the RTI Act.

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: May 24, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

In our experience, the working of the COD has failed. Numerous difficulties are experienced by the COD which are expressed in the letter of the Cabinet Secretary, dated 9th March, 2010. Apart from the said letter, we find in numerous matters concerning public sector companies that different views are expressed by COD which results not only in delay in filing of matters but also results into further litigation. In the circumstances, we find merit in the submission advanced before us by learned Attorney General that time has come to revisit the orders passed by the three Judge Bench of this Court in the case of Oil & Natural Gas Commission vs. Collector of Central Excise (supra)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: May 13, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Parliament is competent to constitute Tribunals for special Acts. However, the failure to ensure independence of judiciary and separation of judicial and executive power renders the Company Law Tribunal unconstitutional. Suggestions given on how to remedy the defects

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: May 8, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

The High Court has dealt with the appeal in a most casual manner. The order is not only cryptic but does not even remotely deal with the arguments projected by the Revenue before it. It is unfortunate that the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court from time to time as to how judgments/orders are to be written are not being adhered to. It is true that brevity is an art but brevity without clarity is likely to enter into the realm of absurdity, which is impermissible. This is reflected in the impugned order. Detailed guidelines laid down as to how judgements should be written

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: April 25, 2010 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Pursuant to the Explanation inserted w.r.e.f. 1.4.1989 a mere provision for bad debt is not entitled to deduction u/s 36(1)(vii). However, in the present case, besides debiting the P&L A/c and creating a provision for bad debts, the assessee had also obliterated the said provision by reducing the corresponding amount from the debtors account in the Balance Sheet. Consequently, the figure in the loans and advances in the Balance Sheet was shown net of the provision for bad debts