Supreme Court Monthly Digest March 2019

Advocates Act, 1961 - S. 26 - Enrolment in the Bar Council - Suppression - Government Service - Involvement in a Criminal Case - Subsequent acquittal cannot come to the rescue - Bar Council of India to remove the name of a person who entered on the Roll of Advocates by misrepresentation - Confirmed by Apex Court - Repeated attempts later amount to an abuse of process. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Anand Kumar Sharma v. Bar Council of India, JT 2019 (3) SC 119 : 2019 (4) Scale 56 C.A. No. 294 of 2007 01-03-2019

Arbitration Act, 1940 - S. 15 - Power of Court to modify award. Ranjan Gogoi (CJI), Sanjay Kishan Kaul & K.M. Joseph, JJ. K. Marappan v. Superintending Engineer T.B.P.H.L.C. Circle Anantapur, C.A. No. 159 of 2010 27-03-2019
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The High Court was not justified in appointing an independent arbitrator without resorting to the procedure for appointment of an arbitrator which has been prescribed under clause 64(3) of the contract under the inbuilt mechanism as agreed by the parties. A.M. Khanwilkar & Ajay Rastogi, JJ. Union of India v. Parmar Construction Company, C.A. No. 3303 of 2019 29-03-2019
Arbitration - Deterring a party to an arbitration from invoking this alternative dispute resolution process by a pre-deposit of 10% would discourage arbitration, contrary to the object of de-clogging the Court system, and would render the arbitral process ineffective and expensive. Rohinton Fali Nariman & Vineet Saran, JJ. Icomm Tele Ltd. v. Punjab State Wate Supply & Sewerage Board, JT 2019 (3) SC 334 : 2019 (4) Scale 549 C.A. No. 2713 of 2019 11-03-2019
Army Law - Provisions governing the appointment of Army Commanders - Discussed. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Lt. Gen. Ravi Dastane, Avsm, Vsm v. Union of India, Ministry of Defence, Through The Secretary, 2019 (4) Scale 39 C.A. No. 9721 of 2014 01-03-2019

Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 / 1980 - Ss. 9(3) (a) to (i) - Board of Directors consists of persons coming from different fields. There cannot, therefore, be a uniform qualification or/and disqualification for such persons. Indeed, the qualifications and disqualifications are bound to vary from category to category and would depend on the post, experience and the stream from where a person is being nominated as a Director. Moreover, the qualification and disqualification has to be seen prior to his/her becoming a Director and not after his/her appointment as a Director. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Fed. of Bank of India Staff Unions v. Union of India, 2019 (4) Scale 50 C.A. No. 5570 of 2014 01-03-2019
Civil P.C. 1908 - O. 14 - Letters Patent Act, 1865 - Cl. 12 - Plea of Territorial Jurisdiction - An issue of territorial jurisdiction cannot be tried by filing an application for revocation of leave. A plea of territorial jurisdiction is essentially a mixed question of law and fact. It is for this reason, the defendants should be allowed to raise such plea in the written statement to enable the Court to try it on its merits in accordance with law. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Isha Distribution House Pvt. Ltd. v. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd., JT 2019 (3) SC 331 : 2019 (4) Scale 474 C.A. No. 2554 of 2019 07-03-2019
Civil P.C. 1908 - O. 23 R. 1A r/w. O. I R. 10 - Court may strike out or add parties - When transposition of defendants as plaintiff may be permitted. Uday Umesh Lalit & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. R. Dhanasundari @ R. Rajeswari v. A.N. Umakanth, 2019 (4) Scale 161 C.A. No. 7292 of 2009 06-03-2019
Civil P.C. 1908 - O. 7 R. 11(d) - Rejection of the Plaint - By mere clever drafting, the plaintiff cannot bring the suit within the period of limitation. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Raghwendra Sharan Singh v. Ram Prasanna Singh, JT 2019 (3) SC 299 C.A. No. 2960 of 2019 13-03-2019
Civil P.C. 1908 - S. 100 - Second Appeal - Jurisdiction of High Court to entertain second appeal under Section 100 CPC after the 1976 Amendment, is confined only when the second appeal involves a substantial question of law. The existence of ‘a substantial question of law’ is a sine qua non for the exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 100 of the CPC. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Gurnam Singh v. Lehna Singh, JT 2019 (3) SC 368 C.A. No. 6567 of 2014 13-03-2019
Civil P.C. 1908 - S. 100 - Substantial Question(s) of Law - the High Court has no jurisdiction to allow the second appeal without framing a substantial question of law as provided under Section 100 of the Code - the sine qua non for allowing the second appeal is to first frame the substantial question(s) of law arising in the case and then decide the second appeal by answering the question(s) framed. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Chand Kaur v. Mehar Kaur, JT 2019 (3) SC 595 C.A. No. 3276 of 2019 28-03-2019
Civil P.C. 1908 - S. 100 (4) - Second Appeal - Substantial Questions of Law - the disposal of the second appeal by the High Court by answering the question(s) which was/were not framed either at the time of admission of the second appeal or framed without ensuring compliance of the mandatory procedure prescribed in proviso to Section 100 (5) of the Code is not legally sustainable. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Tanuku Taluk Village Officers' Association v. Tanuku Municipality, JT 2019 (3) SC 310 C.A. No. 2918 of 2019 12-03-2019
Civil P.C. 1908 - S. 9 - Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 (Haryana) - S. 26 - Bar of Jurisdiction - Section 26 (b) of the Act clearly bars filing of civil suit to examine the legality of the order passed by the Prescribed Authority under the Act - the Civil Court’s jurisdiction is expressly taken away by Section 26(b) of the Act from examining the legality of orders passed under the Act - Remedy of the plaintiffs in such case lies in filing appeal/revision under Section 18 of the Act against the order of the Prescribed Authority. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Meg Raj (Dead) Thr. L.Rs. v. Manphool (Dead) Thr. L.Rs., C.A. No. 7426 of 2011 15-03-2019
Companies Act, 2013 - S. 212(1)(c) - Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 - Ss. 43(2) & (3)(c)(i) - Companies (Arrests in connection with Investigation by Serious Fraud Investigation Office) Rules, 2017 - Rule (2) - Establishment of Serious Fraud Investigation Office - Investigation of the affairs of limited liability partnership. Abhay Manohar Sapre & U.U. Lalit, JJ. Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Rahul Modi, JT 2019 (3) SC 597 Crl.A. No. 538 of 2019 27-03-2019
Company Law - National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016 - Rule 48 - Issue of Notice - No notice was served upon the appellant before the NCLAT as stipulated under the rules, and the right of the appellant to be heard, audi alteram partem, has been violated. N.V. Ramana & Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ. Jai Balaji Industries Limited v. State Bank of India, C.A. No. 1929 of 2019 08-03-2019
Competition Act, 2002 - S. 53T - Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 - S. 55 - the issues which would arise in the present case related to unfair trade practices and whether the terms and conditions in the agreement to sell/allotment agreement were valid and good. These aspects were not gone into and examined primarily because the appellant did not have proper legal guidance and assistance. Ranjan Gogoi (CJI), L. Nageswara Rao & Sanjiv Khanna, JJ. Sudha Gupta v. DLF Ltd., 2019 (4) Scale 532 C.A. No. 9646 of 2013 07-03-2019
Constitution of India - Art. 226 - Administrative decisions are subject to judicial review only on grounds of perversity, patent illegality, irrationality, want of power to take the decision and procedural irregularity. Except on these grounds administrative decisions are not interfered with, in exercise of the extra ordinary power of judicial review. Judicial review under Article 226 is directed, not against the decision, but the decision making process. R. Banumathi & Indira Banerjee, JJ. Sarvepalli Ramaiah (d) Tr. Lrs. v. District Collector Chittoor Dist., C.A. No. 7461 of 2009 14-03-2019
Constitution of India - Art. 226 - It is not the function of the Courts to frame any Scheme but it is the sole prerogative of the Government to do it. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Union of India v. All India Trade Union Congress, JT 2019 (3) SC 432 C.A. No. 3146 of 2019 15-03-2019
Consumer Law - A buyer can be expected to wait for possession for a reasonable period. A period of seven years is beyond what is reasonable. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Kolkata West International City Pvt. Ltd. v. Devasis Rudra, C.A. No. 3182 of 2019 25-03-2019
Consumer Law - Insurance - Loss and damage to the roads which had been worked upon due to “abnormal rainfall and water logging” - due to heavy rains on 29 June 2007, the roads were inundated and the top layer had been washed out - Held, there was only surface damage and no evidence of the road having been washed out as a result of excessive monsoon rain or inundation - the dates on which the alleged damage is stated to have occurred had not witnessed excessive rainfall and the rain was within normal parameters - failure of the appellant to examine any expert in regard to the cause of the damage is a significant omission - Insurance policy specifically excluded normal wear and tear - In order to establish that this was not a case involving normal wear and tear, the appellant sought to rely upon what it described as abnormal rainfall and water logging - Evidence on the record did not sustain the basis of such a claim. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Mahavir Road and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd., C.A. No. 7315 of 2016 25-03-2019
Consumer Law - Shipments (Comprehensive Risk) Policy. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Export Credit Guarantee Corpn. of India Ltd. v. M.S. Creations, C.A. No. 2987 of 2019 13-03-2019
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - S. 23 - Appeal - the Commission does have the jurisdiction to dismiss the complaint in limine and decline its admission without notice to the opposite party. However, such jurisdiction to dismiss the complaint in limine has to be exercised by the Commission having regard to facts of each case, i.e., in appropriate case. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Anjaneya Jewellery v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., JT 2019 (3) SC 192 : 2019 (4) Scale 480 C.A. No. 6878 of 2018 07-03-2019
Criminal P.C. 1973 - S. 125 - the need to remand the case to the SDJM is called for only when some factual inquiry is required to be held to decide any factual issue involved in the case which cannot be undertaken at the revision stage or when it is noticed that there is no finding on any particular factual issue(s) recorded by the SDJM or when additional evidence is filed for the first time at the appellate/revision stage which requires examination by the SDJM in the first instance and to record a finding in the light of such additional evidence. Such is not the case here because all the material for fixing the maintenance was on record. It is for these reasons, there was no need to remand the case to the SDMJ as it would only prolong the litigation causing harm to the respondent(wife). Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Manik Kutum v. Julie Kutum, JT 2019 (3) SC 190 : 2019 (4) Scale 478 Crl.A. No. 448 of 2019 07-03-2019
Criminal P.C. 1973 – S. 319 - Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence - Mere disclosing the names of the accused cannot be said to be strong and cogent evidence to make them to stand trial for the offence - Additional accused cannot be summoned under Section 319 of the Code in casual and cavalier manner in the absence of strong and cogent evidence - Can be summoned only if there is more than prima facie case as is required at the time of framing of charge but which is less than the satisfaction required at the time of conclusion of the trial convicting the accused. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Periyasami v. S. Nallasamy, JT 2019 (3) SC 294 Crl.A. No. 456 of 2019 14-03-2019
Criminal P.C. 1973 - S. 482 - Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 143, 147, 148, 323, 392, 395 & 397 - Quashing of FIR - The High Court instead of quashing the FIR at such a preliminary stage should have directed the IO to make proper investigation on the basis of the FIR and then file proper charge sheet on the basis of the material collected in the investigation accordingly. It was, however, not done. It was more so because, the FIR did disclose prima facie allegations of commission of concerned offences. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Rafiq Ahmedbhai Paliwala v. State of Gujarat, Crl.A. No. 506 of 2019 15-03-2019
Criminal P.C. 1973 - Ss. 397 r/w. 401 - Penal Code, 1860 - S. 306 - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - S. 3(2)(V) - High Court has evidently ignored what has emerged during the course of the investigation - material indicates that several complaints were filed by the deceased - last of them was filed a few days before the suicide - It is alleged that the respondent had taken a loan of Rs 5 lakhs through fraudulent means in the name of the deceased and an altercation took place between him and the deceased in that regard - respondent is alleged to have got the deceased evicted from a rented house as well as terminated from her employment at Central Bank - there is a dying declaration - there is sufficient material on record to uphold the order framing charges of the Trial Court - discharge of the accused was not justified. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ State of Madhya Pradesh v. Deepak, Crl.A. No. 485 of 2019 13-03-2019
Criminal Trail - Criminal Justice should not become a casualty because of the minor mistakes committed by the Investigating Officer. N.V. Ramana, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar & Indira Banerjee, JJJ. Sachin Kumar Singhraha v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Crl.A. No. 473 of 2019 12-03-2019
Criminal Trial - While it is necessary that proof beyond reasonable doubt should be adduced in all criminal cases, it is not necessary that such proof should be perfect, and someone who is guilty cannot get away with impunity only because the truth may develop some infirmity when projected through human processes. N.V. Ramana & Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ. Pattu Rajan v. State of Tamil Nadu, Crl.A. No. 680 of 2009 29-03-2019
Disciplinary Inquiry - The standard of proof in a disciplinary inquiry and in a trial of a criminal case are entirely different. In a criminal case it is essential to prove a charge beyond all reasonable doubt wherein in disciplinary inquiry under Anti-Corruption Code of BCCI the preponderance of probability is to serve the purpose. Ashok Bhushan & K.M. Joseph, JJ. S. Sreesanth v. Board of Control for Cricket in India, JT 2019 (3) SC 377 C.A. No. 2424 of 2019 15-03-2019
Doctrine of Merger - Review Petition - Whether review petition is maintainable before the High Court seeking review of a judgment against which the special leave petition has already been dismissed by Supreme Court. Held, Since special leave petition was dismissed in limine without giving any reasons, the review petition filed by the appellant in the High Court would be maintainable and should have been decided on merits. A.K. Sikri & Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ. Khoday Distilleries Ltd. (now Khoday India Ltd) v. Mahadeshwara Sahakara Ssakkare Karkhane Ltd., 2019 (4) Scale 113 C.A. No. 2432 of 2019 01-03-2019
Education Law - Whether the appellant institution had applied to the respondent no. 1, Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council within the last date, which was 22nd December, 2018 or not, and if so applied, whether the same was complete in all respects. Rohinton Fali Nariman & Vineet Saran, JJ. Bateswari Dayal Mishr Shiksha Samiti v. Madhya Pradesh Nurses Registration Council, C.A. No. 3137 of 2019 15-03-2019
Education - Closure of School - The students presently enrolled in the Ashram school run by the appellant would be put to great prejudice if the school is to be closed as a result of dismissal of these appeals, it is directed that said school may continue till the academic session 2019-2020. However, the school of the appellant which is presently functioning by virtue of Resolution dated 02.01.2012 shall not be allowed to function from the academic session 2020-2021. U.U. Lalit & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Sanstha v. State of Maharashtra, JT 2019 (3) SC 154 : 2019 (4) Scale 1 C.A. No. 9384 of 2014 05-03-2019
Electricity Act, 2003 - Ss. 135 & 152 - Criminal P.C. 1973 - Ss. 41 & 482 - Theft of Electricity - Compounding of offences - Settlement arrived at between the parties - Quashing of the FIR - the issue in question needs to be decided in the light of Section 152 of the Act, which deals with compounding of offences under the Act - High Court did not examine the issue in the light of Section 152 of the Act - remanded the case to the High Court to examine the issue afresh keeping in view the provisions of Section 152 of the Act. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Mukesh Chand v. State (Nct) of Delhi, JT 2019 (3) SC 308 Crl.A. No. 469 of 2019 12-03-2019
Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 - Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952 - Relevant Stipulations in the Scheme - Objects and Reasons behind the Act of 1952 - Relevant Provisions - Discussed. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Modern Transportation Consultation Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation, C.A. No. 7698 of 2009 26-03-2019
Environmental Law - Airports - Scheme of the 2006 notification and the Guidance manual for Airports - EIA process - Guidance manual for airports - Forests - Ecologically Sensitive Zones (ESZs) - Sampling Points - Air Quality - Water Quality - Noise Quality - Flora and Fauna - Felling of Trees - Public Consultation - Appraisal by the EAC - The appellate jurisdiction of the NGT: the requirement of a merits review - Environmental Rule of Law - Directions. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India, C.A. No. 12251 of 2018 29-03-2019
Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27 - Recovery - It is not the discovery of every fact that is admissible but the discovery of relevant fact is alone admissible. Relevancy is nothing but the connection or the link between the facts discovered with the crime. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. Digamber Vaishnav v. State of Chattisgarh, 2019 (4) Scale 254 Crl.A. No. 428 of 2019 05-03-2019
Excise Duty - National Calamity Contingent Duty (‘NCCD’) - Once the excise duty is exempted, NCCD, levied as an excise duty cannot partake a different character and, thus, would be entitled to the benefit of the exemption notification. L. Nageswara Rao & Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ. Bajaj Auto Limited v. Union of India, C.A. No. 3239 of 2019 27-03-2019
Fair Trial - All the contesting parties to the suit must get fair opportunity to contest the suit on merits in accordance with law. A decision rendered by the Courts in an unsatisfactory conducting of the trial of the suit is not legally sustainable. It is regardless of the fact that in whose favour the decision in the trial may go. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Rajinder Tiwari v. Kedar Nath, C.A. No. 3282 of 2019 28-03-2019
Forest Act, 1927 - Ss. 41, 52 & 52A - Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 - Ss. 27, 29, 39(1)(d), 51 & 52 - Criminal P.C. 1973 - Ss. 451 & 482 - Order for custody and disposal of property pending trial in certain cases - The jurisdiction under Section 451 of the CrPC was not available to the Magistrate, once the Authorised Officer initiated confiscation proceedings. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Uday Singh, Crl.A. No. 524 of 2019 26-03-2019
Guardians & Wards Act, 1890 – Divorce and custody battles can become quagmire and it is heart wrenching to see that the innocent child is the ultimate sufferer who gets caught up in the legal and psychological battle between the parents. A.M. Khanwilkar & Ajay Rastogi, JJ. Lahari Sakhamuri v. Sobhan Kodali, C.A. No. 3135 of 2019 15-03-2019
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 - S. 22 - Preferential right to acquire property in certain cases - Scope and Applicability of - Whether preferential right given to an heir of a Hindu under said Section 22 will be inapplicable if the property in question is an agricultural land ? Held, the preferential right given to an heir of a Hindu under Section 22 of the Act is applicable even if the property in question is an agricultural land. Uday Umesh Lalit & M.R. Shah, JJ. Babu Ram v. Santokh Singh, C.A. No. 2553 of 2019 07-03-2019
Inadvertent Mistake - Application for amendment of the plaint - Inadvertent mistake cannot be refused to be corrected when the mistake is apparent from the reading of the plaint. The Rules of Procedure are handmaid of justice and cannot defeat the substantive rights of the parties. It is well settled that amendment in the pleadings cannot be refused merely because of some mistake, negligence, inadvertence or even infraction of the Rules of Procedure. The Court always gives leave to amend the pleadings even if a party is negligent or careless as the power to grant amendment of the pleadings is intended to serve the ends of justice and is not governed by any such narrow or technical limitations. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Varun Pahwa v. Renu Chaudhary, JT 2019 (3) SC 109 : 2019 (4) Scale 75 C.A. No. 2431 of 2019 01-03-2019
Income Tax Act 1961 - S. 142 (2C) - Interpretation of - the provisions of Section 142 (2C) of the Act, as they stood prior to the amendment which was enacted with effect from 1 April 2008 by the Finance Act, 2008 did not preclude the exercise of jurisdiction and authority by the assessing officer to extend time for the submission of the audit report directed under subsection (2A), without an application by the assessee - the amendment was intended to remove an ambiguity and is clarificatory in nature. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi v. Ram Kishan Dass, C.A. No. 3211 of 2019 26-03-2019
Income Tax Act, 1961 - Chap. XV, S. 260­A - Companies Act, 1956 - S. 560(5) - "liability in special cases" - "discontinuance of business or dissolution" - How and in what manner the liability against Companies, whose name has been struck of is required to be dealt with - the High Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that it has rendered infructuous because it was brought to its notice that the name of the company has been struck off from the Register of the Company - Since the High Court did not decide the appeal keeping in view the relevant provisions, the impugned order is not legally sustainable and has to be set aside. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur v. Gopal Shri Scrips Pvt. Ltd., JT 2019 (3) SC 329 C.A. No. 2922 of 2019 12-03-2019
Income Tax Act, 1961 - Issue relating to waiver of interest payable under Sections 234A , 234B, and 234C of the Act. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Kakadia Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 (3), 2019 (4) Scale 20 C.A. No. 2491 of 2019 05-03-2019
Income Tax Act, 1961 - S. 35­D - Whether the Bank is an industrial undertaking so as to entitle them to claim deduction under Section 35­D of the Act. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8 v. Yes Bank Ltd., C.A. No. 3148 of 2019 15-03-2019
Income Tax Act, 1961 - S. 80HH - Deduction - Computation - Deduction in respect of profits and gains from newly established industrial undertakings or hotel business in backward areas - Deduction @ 20% of ‘profits and gains’ - Deduction has to be of gross profits and gains, i.e., before computing the income as specified in Sections 30 to 43D of the Act. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJ. Vijay Industries v. Commissioner of Income Tax, JT 2019 (3) SC 160 : 2019 (4) Scale 79 C.A. No. 1581 of 2005 01-03-2019
Income-tax Act, 1961 - S. 68 - Cash Credits - The practice of conversion of un-accounted money through the cloak of Share Capital/Premium must be subjected to careful scrutiny. This would be particularly so in the case of private placement of shares, where a higher onus is required to be placed on the Assessee since the information is within the personal knowledge of the Assessee. The Assessee is under a legal obligation to prove the receipt of share capital/premium to the satisfaction of the AO, failure of which, would justify addition of the said amount to the income of the Assessee. Uday Umesh Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 1 v. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd., JT 2019 (3) SC 137 : 2019 (4) Scale 25 C.A. No. 2463 of 2019 05-03-2019
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - S. 10 - Factual controversy cannot be adjudicated in OA by the Tribunal or by the High Court in a writ petition. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Sunil Kumar Biswas v. Ordinance Factory Board, C.A. No. 3290 of 2019 29-03-2019
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - S. 17B - Payment of full wages to workman pending proceedings in higher courts - If the Court/Tribunal, eventually upholds the termination order as being legal against the workman, yet the employer will have no right to recover the amount already paid by him to the delinquent workman pursuant to order passed under Section 17­B of the ID Act during pendency of these proceedings. Dilip Mani Dubey v. Siel Ltd., JT 2019 (3) SC 345 C.A. No. 7545 of 2009 12-03-2019
Insurance Law - Accident - Disease - In order to constitute an accident, the event must be in the nature of an occurrence which is unnatural, unforeseen or unexpected. Where a disease is caused or transmitted in the natural course of events, it would not be covered by the definition of an accident. However, in a given case or circumstance, the affliction or bodily condition may be regarded as an accident where its cause or course of transmission is unexpected and unforeseen. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mousumi Bhattacharjee, JT 2019 (3) SC 532 C.A. No. 2614 of 2019 26-03-2019
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - S. 4 - the comparable sale transactions of small extents of land which were brought on record by the Claimants are not a proper indicia for determining the market value. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Balwant Singh (d) Thr Lrs. Gurbinder Singh v. State of Haryana, 2019 (4) Scale 542 C.A. No. 2736 of 2019 11-03-2019
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - S. 4 - Whether the landowner is entitled to claim enhancement in the rate of compensation awarded by the High Court. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Rameshwar Dass v. State of Punjab, C.A. No. 3024 of 2019 14-03-2019
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - S. 4 (1) - Appellant has not produced any document to substantiate its contention that the writ petitioners are not the title holders of the land. On the other hand the writ petitioners have produced their title deeds in relation to the said land. The appellant is not justified in contending that the writ petitioners are not the title holders of the land. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJ. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority v. Lt. Col. J.B. Kuchhal (dead), 2019 (4 ) Scale 214 C.A. No. 2478 of 2019 05-03-2019
Land Law - U.P. Imposition of Ceiling of Land Holdings Act, 1960 - S. 10 (2) - Issue relating to vesting of the land in question alive which stood vested in the State in the year 1981 itself. Indeed the excess land measuring 2.90 acres is no more available having stood vested with the State in 1981. There is no ground available to the appellants to revive the ceiling proceedings by taking recourse to filing one application or the other including the one under consideration. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Sheetla Devi v. State of Uttar Pradesh Collector / District Magistrate, C.A. No. 6403 of 2009 12-03-2019
Land Law - U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 - Sections 134, 137 - Acquisition of bhumidhari rights by a sirdar - Grant of certificate. Rakesh v. Board of Revenue U.P., 08-03-2019 JT 2019 (3) SC 409 : 2019 (4) Scale 521
Limitation Act, 1963 - Art. 54 - the vendee cannot claim that the cause of action for filing the suit has not arisen on the date fixed in contract on the ground that certain conditions in the contract have not been complied with. L. Nageswara Rao & Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ. Urvashi Aggarwal v. Kushagr Ansal, JT 2019 (3) SC 183 : 2019 (4) Scale 180 C.A. No. 2525 of 2019 06-03-2019
Limitation Act, 1963 - Ss. 5 - Second Appeal - Delay of 1942 days - Lawyer did not take timely steps, which resulted in causing delay in its filing / refiling, then, it cannot be regarded as a sufficient cause. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority v. Gopi Chand Atreja, JT 2019 (3) SC 348 C.A. No. 5051 of 2009 12-03-2019
Mala Fides - Plea of - Averments by itself do not constitute a plea of mala fides without there being any substantial material in its support. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. V. Krishnamurthy v. State of Tamil Nadu, JT 2019 (3) SC 543 C.A. No. 7703 of 2009 26-03-2019
Medical Negligence - Quantum of Compensation - Award of compensation cannot go restrictive when the victim is coming from a poor and rural background. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Shoda Devi v. DDU / Ripon Hospital Shimla, JT 2019 (3) SC 194 : 2019 (4) Scale 482 C.A. No. 2557 of 2019 07-03-2019
Mines & Minerals - Lease - Sand - Export - Once the State permits sand to be excavated, neither can it legally restrict its movement within the territory of India nor is the same constitutionally permissible. Likewise, there is no restriction on the State importing sand from other states. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJ. State of Gujarat v. Jayeshbhai Kanji Bhai Kalathiya, 2019 (4) Scale 92 C.A. No. 10373 of 2010 01-03-2019
Motor Accidents Claims - the process of assessment of compensation in the present case had been too uncertain, rather vague, and unreasonably restrictive; and the amount as awarded to the appellants cannot be said to be that of just compensation. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Shantaben v. National Power Transport, 2019 (4) Scale 169 C.A. No. 2523 of 2019 06-03-2019
Motor Vehicles - Accident - Future Earning - Computation - Motor Accidents Mediation Authority (MAMA) - Directions / Recommendations. A.K. Sikri & S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. M.R. Krishna Murthi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., 2019 (4) Scale 362 C.A. No. 2476 of 2019 05-03-2019
Murder & Rape - False Implication - Compensation - It is to be noted that all the accused persons are nomadic tribes coming from the lower strata of the society and are very poor labourers. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, false implication cannot be ruled out since it is common occurrence that in serious offences sometime innocent persons are roped in. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJ. Ankush Maruti Shinde v. State of Maharashtra, 2019 (4) Scale 266 Crl.A. No. 1008 of 2007 05-03-2019
National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - The NGT Act being a beneficial legislation, the power bestowed upon the Tribunal would not be read narrowly. An interpretation which furthers the interests of environment must be given a broader reading. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJ. Mantri Zone Pvt. Ltd. v. Forward Foundation, 2019 (4) Scale 218 C.A. No. 5016 of 2016 05-03-2019
Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 - S. 138 - Remand - there was neither any need and nor any occasion to remand the case to the Magistrate - there was enough material before the Appellate Court on the basis of which the appeal on merits could have been decided one way or the other instead of remanding the case to the Magistrate for deciding it afresh. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Susanta Dey v. Babli Majumdar, JT 2019 (4) SC 1 Crl.A. No. 2103 of 2008 28-03-2019
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - S. 138 - Cheques were issued under and in pursuance of the agreement to sell. Though it is well settled that an agreement to sell does not create any interest in immoveable property, it nonetheless constitutes a legally enforceable contract between the parties to it. A payment which is made in pursuance of such an agreement is hence a payment made in pursuance of a duly enforceable debt or liablity for the purposes of Section 138. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Ripudaman Singh v. Balkrishna, Crl.A. No. 483 of 2019 13-03-2019
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Ss. 118 & 138 - In the scheme of the NI Act, mere creation of doubt is not sufficient. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Rohitbhai Jivanlal Patel v. State of Gujarat, JT 2019 (3) SC 485 Crl.A. No. 508 of 2019 15-03-2019
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - S. 2(e) - teachers were brought within the purview of “employee” as defined in Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act by Amending Act No. 47 of 2009 with retrospective effect from 03.04.1997. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Birla Institute of Technology v. State of Jharkhand, JT 2019 (3) SC 201 : 2019 (4) Scale 464 C.A. No. 2530 of 2012 07-03-2019
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - S. 2(e) - Whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is an ‘employee’ as per the Act, and is entitled to payment of Gratuity under this Act? Uday Umesh Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices v. Gursewak Singh, C.A. No. 3150 of 2019 15-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - S. 376 - the prosecutrix was in habit of implicating all the persons by making wild allegations of such nature against those with whom she or/and her husband were having any kind of disputes. Ganga Prasad Mahto v. State of Bihar, JT 2019 (3) SC 530 Crl.A. No. 526 of 2019 26-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Murder - the accused has killed six innocent persons in a pre-planned manner - the case would fall in the category of the “rarest of rare case” warranting death sentence / capital punishment. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJ. Khushwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, JT 2019 (3) SC 313 : 2019 (4) Scale 187 Crl.A. No. 1433 of 2014 05-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 342 & 450 - Unlawful Assembly - In a crime committed by an unlawful assembly by principle of vicarious liability, every member of the unlawful assembly would be guilty of the offence, even if he himself had not done the actual act. But the facts must indicate with clarity that such person was in fact a member of the unlawful assembly. Uday Umesh Lalit & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Dauwalal @ Ganesh Devangan v. State of Madhya Pradesh (Now State of Chhattisgarh), Crl.A. No. 478 of 2019 15-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 170, 412 & 395 - Incident had occurred nearly 19 years ago - there was no previous antecedents - ready to pay the enhanced fine, although his monetary condition is poor - in the peculiar facts and surrounding circumstances of the case, Court reduced the sentence from seven years R.I. to five years R.I. and enhance the fine to Rs.20,000/ each. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Jahangir Hussain v. State of West Bengal, Crl.A. No. 712 of 2009 29-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 302 r/w. 109 & 203 - Forest Act, 1882 (Tamil Nadu) - S. 36­A & E - Arms Act, 1959 - S. 3 r/w. 25 (1­B) (a) - Right of Private Defence. Abhay Manohar Sapre & R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. Sukumaran v. State Rep. By The Inspectr of Police, 2019 (4) Scale 490 Crl.A. No. 5 of 2009 07-03-2019 07-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 302 r/w. 149 & 147 - Mere presence in an unlawful assembly cannot render a person liable unless there was a common object. N.V. Ramana, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar & Indira Banerjee, JJJ. Amrika Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh, Crl.A. No. 1036 of 2011 29-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 302 r/w. 34 - Murder - Life Imprisonment - Scope of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC - In order to bring the case within Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, the following conditions enumerated therein must be satisfied:- (i) The act must be committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion; (ii) upon a sudden quarrel; (iii) without the offender’s having taken undue advantage; and (iv) the accused had not acted in a cruel or unusual manner. Even if the fight is unpremeditated and sudden, if the weapon or manner of retaliation is disproportionate to the offence and if the accused had taken the undue advantage of the deceased, the accused cannot be protected under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC. R. Banumathi & R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. Nandlal v. State of Maharashtra, JT 2019 (3) SC 448 Crl.A. No. 510 of 2019 15-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 302, 307, 341 & 34 - Arms Act, 1959 - Ss. 25, 54 & 59 - Criminal P.C. 1973 - S. 319 - Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence - Degree of satisfaction required for invoking the powers under Section 319 CrPC - Principles. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab, Crl.A. No. 509 of 2019 15-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 302, 323, 504 & 506 r/w. 34 - Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention - Test for applicability of Section 34 in a fact situation of an offence - Discussed. Ashok Bhushan & K.M. Joseph, JJ. Asif Khan v. State of Maharashtra, JT 2019 (3) SC 172 : 2019 (4) Scale 7 Crl.A. No. 286 of 2019 05-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 302, 392 r/w. 34 - Police Act, 1951 (Bombay) - Ss. 37(1) r/w. 135 - Arms Act, 1959 - S. 3 (25) - Circumstantial Evidence - There are too many missing links - benefit of doubt - Acquitted. U.U. Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Pavan Vasudeo Sharma v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Crl.A. No. 519 of 2019 25-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 307 & 34 - Criminal P.C. 1973 - Ss. 320 & 482 - Mechanically quashed the FIR - Non-compoundable offences - Seriousness of the offences and its social impact - Distinction between a personal or private wrong and a social wrong and the social impact. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJ. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, 2019 (4) Scale 200 Crl.A. No. 349 of 2019 05-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 307 / 34 & 326 - Criminal P.C. 1973 - Ss. 357 & 357­A - Acid Attack - Compensation - Victim had suffered an uncivilised and heartless crime committed by the respondents and there is no room for leniency which can be conceived. A crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency. This Court cannot be oblivious of the situation that the victim must have suffered an emotional distress which cannot be compensated either by sentencing the accused or by grant of any compensation. A.M. Khanwilkar & Ajay Rastogi, JJ. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Vijay Kumar @ Pappu, Crl.A. No. 753 of 2010 15-03-2019
Penal Code, 1860 - Ss. 323, 324, 452, 504 & 506 - Revision - The least that was expected of was that the High Court will apply its judicial mind to the factual and legal aspects arising in the case and then pass appropriate orders either for upholding the conviction or acquitting the appellants, as the case may be - the High Court failed to do this and hence interference is called for. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Harveer Singh v. State of U.P., Crl.A. No. 505 of 2019 15-03-2019
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Ss. 7 r/w. 13(1) (d) - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - S. 227 - Application for Discharge - Principles - While considering the case of discharge sought immediately after the charge­sheet is filed, the Court cannot become an Appellate Court and start appreciating the evidence by finding out inconsistency in the statements of the witnesses. It is not legally permissible. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. State v. J. Doraiswamy, JT 2019 (3) SC 288 : 2019 (4) Scale 471 Crl.A. No. 445 of 2019 07-03-2019
Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Kaikhosrou (Chick) Kavasji Framji v. Union of India, C.A. No. 5574 of 2009 15-03-2019
Ram Janmabhoomi Case - Ayodhya Matter - Regarding Mediation Proceedings. Ranjan Gogoi (CJI), Sharad Arvind Bobde, D.Y. Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan, JJ. M. Siddiq (d) Thr. Lrs. v. Mahant Suresh Das, 2019 (4) Scale 359 C.A. No. 10866 of 2010 08-03-2019
Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - Section 2 (zk) - “promoter” - Definition of. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Association for Consumer Welfare and Aid v. Granite Gate Properties Private Limited, C.A. No. 259 of 2019 25-03-2019
Rent Control & Eviction - A married daughter would have a right of succession in the “lease premises” also. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Uma Mahesh Bandekar v. Vivek Sadanand Marathe, JT 2019 (3) SC 546 C.A. No. 2961 of 2019 13-03-2019
Review - The High Court unless looks into the facts of the appellant’s case and pleadings made therein the writ petition could not have been decided. Ashok Bhushan & K.M. Joseph, JJ. Krishna Nand Shukla v. Director of Higher Education Allahabad, JT 2019 (3) SC 325 : 2019 (4) Scale 157 C.A. No. 2544 of 2019 06-03-2019
Service Law - Age Relaxation - The Division Bench did not consider the submissions whether the Respondents could, as a matter of right, claim relaxation in age limit. Without considering said aspect of the matter, the Division Bench proceeded to pass the directions. The assessment made by the Division Bench was completely incorrect. U.U. Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Electronic Corporation of India Ltd. v. M. Shivani, JT 2019 (3) SC 285 : 2019 (4) Scale 539 C.A. No. 2560 of 2019 08-03-2019
Service Law - Arrears and Other Benefits - Grant of - Delay - Only in a case where the delay is attributable to the employee the benefit can be restricted. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Giridhar v. State of Maharashtra, C.A. No. 957 of 2017 06-03-2019
Service Law - Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules (CCS Rules) - Rule 26 - In case of resignation from service or a post, unless the matter was covered under Sub-Rule 2 of Rule 26 of CCS Rules, it would entail forfeiture of past service. Since the past service would stand forfeited, the same would be excluded from the period of qualifying service, and as such for deciding the question of entitlement to pension, the employee would not have the qualifying period of service. U.U. Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. State of Punjab v. Gurbaran Singh, 2019 (4) Scale 617 C.A. No. 2411 of 2019 01-03-2019
Service Law - Central Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 - Rule 4 - Restriction on commutation of pension - Commuted Value of Pension (CVP) - What is the nature of CVP. Is there legal right to receive CVP? Can there be cases where for delayed payment of CVP, interest can be ordered? Is there any provision which provides for interest? - Discussed. Ashok Bhushan & K.M. Joseph, JJ. Chief General Manager Gujarat Telecom Circle, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Manilal Ambalal Patel, 2019 (4) Scale 500 C.A. No. 1681 of 2019 08-03-2019
Service Law - Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 - R. 37 (1) - Pension on absorption in or under a corporation, company or body - a Government servant who is absorbed in a Corporation or Government Company is deemed to have retired from government service on the date of his/her absorption. Uday Umesh Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. P. Bandopadhya v. Union of India, JT 2019 (3) SC 436 C.A. No. 3149 of 2019 15-03-2019
Service Law - Compassionate Appointment - Delay - The claim was liable to be rejected on that ground. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Govt. of India v. P. Venkatesh, C.A. No. 2425 of 2019 01-03-2019
Service Law - It was for the employee to know the rule. The department was not expected to advise and/or tell the employee about how the seniority will be fixed and/or about the rota­quota rule. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. P. Subramaniyam v. Union of India, JT 2019 (3) SC 429 C.A. No. 7779 of 2012 15-03-2019
Service Law - Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 - Caretaker on temporary basis - It is now almost 19 years that the respondent has been out of appellant’s services - the interest of justice would be met if a compensation of Rs.One Lakh (Rs.1,00,000/­) is awarded to the respondent in full and final satisfaction in lieu of his right to claim reinstatement in the appellant's services and also in lieu of all his service claims against the appellant. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Dinesh Singh, JT 2019 (3) SC 542 C.A. No. 3197 of 2019 26-03-2019
Service Law - Pension - It would be inadvisable to expand such beneficial schemes beyond their contours to extend them to employees for whom they were not meant for by the Legislature. Ranjan Gogoi (CJI), Sanjay Kishan Kaul & K.M. Joseph, JJ. Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Shree Lal Meena, JT 2019 (3) SC 469 C.A. No. 14739 of 2015 15-03-2019
Service Law - Recommendation for appointment to the post of Director General of Police by the Union Public Service Commission and preparation of panel should be purely on the basis of merit from officers who have a minimum residual tenure of six months i.e. officers who have at least six months of service prior to the retirement. Ranjan Gogoi (CJI), L. Nageswara Rao & Sanjiv Khanna, JJ. Prakash Singh v. U. O. I., JT 2019 (3) SC 291 W.P. (C) No. 310 of 1996 13-03-2019
Service Law - Tamil Nadu Revenue Subordinate Service Rules (TNRSS Rules) - Implementation of the amended Rule 5(g) in Annexure-III, item No. (ii). R. Banumathi & R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. A. Rajagopalan v. District Collector, Thiruchirapalli District, C.A. No. 251 of 2015 12-03-2019
Service Law - The appellant did not at any stage challenge the appointment of the respondent to the post of JDTP nor did he challenge the GR dated 20 March 2003 providing for consequential seniority. The appellant was not eligible for the post of DTP on 30 April 2016, when the vacancy occurred. He cannot, hence, challenge the appointment of the first respondent. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Sudhakar Baburao Nangnure v. Noreshwar Raghunathrao Shende, 2019 (4) Scale 417 C.A. No. 2468 of 2019 05-03-2019
Service Law - Unless and until that governing criteria was departed from specifically, mere expression “consequential benefits” would not entitle the concerned employees anything greater than what was contemplated in the policy documents issued by the State Government. Uday Umesh Lalit & M.R. Shah, JJ. K. Ananda Rao v. S.S. Rawat, IAS, 2019 (4) Scale 447 Cont. P. (C) No. 1045 of 2018 07-03-2019
Special Marriage Act, 1954 - Ss. 24 & 25 - Once the marriage is void the same is a nullity and at any time the same can be declared as nullity being a void marriage. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Swapnanjali Sandeep Patil v. Sandeep Ananda Patil, C.A. No. 2534 of 2019 06-03-2019
Tax Law - Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 - S. 6­B (1). A.M. Khanwilkar & Ajay Rastogi, JJ. Achal Industries v. State of Karnataka, C.A. No. 4837 of 2011 28-03-2019
Tax Law - Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 - Which is the proper Entry under the VAT Act for charging tax on "Mobile Crane Wire Ropes" - Whether the goods "Mobile Cranes Wire Ropes" fall under Entry 155 of Schedule IV or under the Residuary Entry of Schedule V of the VAT Act - Held, the wire ropes used in the Mobile Cranes are a part of the Mobile Cranes and thus fall in Entry 155 of Schedule IV of the VAT Act - It is taxable at the rate of 4%. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. CTO, Anti Evasion, Circle III, Rajasthan, Jaipur v. Prasoon Enterprises, Jaipur, JT 2019 (3) SC 590 C.A. No. 3198 of 2019 26-03-2019
Tax Law - Whether the sugarcane purchase price paid to the cane growers by the assessee-society more than the SMP and is determined under Clause 5A of the Control Order, 1966, can be said to be the sharing of profit/appropriation of profit or is allowable as expenditure. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJ. C.I.T. Bombay v. Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd., 2019 (4) Scale 242 C.A. No. 8890 of 2012 05-03-2019
Previous Post Next Post