High Court
S.62 CGST Act | Filing Pending Returns Automatically Withdraws Best-Judgment Assessment: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a best judgment assessment passed under Section 62 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 stands deemed withdrawn once the registered dealer files the pending returns along with payment of tax and applicable late fee, even if such returns are filed beyond the initially prescribed period. A Division Bench comprising...
DDA Has No Obligation To Provide Infrastructure Before Full Payment On Plots Sold On 'As Is Where Is Basis: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh observed that where DDA has sold plots to buyers on “as is where is basis”, the buyer cannot refuse to pay the balance sale consideration on the ground that DDA did not provide the requisite civic amenities. In such a situation, DDA has no obligation to provide the facilities as a pre-requisite to...
Delhi High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal In Avery Dennison Transfer Pricing Case, Upholds ITAT Order On Intra-Group Services
The Delhi High Court has dismissed the Income Tax Department's appeal against M/s Avery Dennison (India) Pvt. Ltd., reaffirming that no substantial question of law arises where the Transfer Pricing Officer's (TPO) conclusions are unsupported by cogent evidence and the issue stands settled in favour of the assessee in earlier years. A Division Bench comprising Justice V. Kameswar Rao...
Delhi High Court Summons Woodland's MD and Senior Manager In Trademark Infringement Suit
The Delhi High Court has summoned Woodland (Aero Club) Pvt. Ltd.'s Managing Director Harkirat Singh and Senior Manager Madan Kalra to personally appear and file affidavits explaining why key correspondence with rival manufacturer Speedways Tyre Treads was not disclosed in Woodland's trademark infringement suit. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora issued the direction on December 01, 2025...
GST Demand Cannot Exceed Amount Mentioned In Show Cause Notice: J&K&L High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that a tax demand under GST cannot exceed the amount mentioned in the show cause notice and that doing so violates basic principles of fairness. The Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar set aside a GST demand raised against a goods transport agency (GTA), after finding that the final demand was...
ITAT Cannot Re-Adjudicate Issues Under Guise Of Rectification U/S 254(2) Income Tax Act: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has held that the rectification power under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act is akin to the review power under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC and is limited to rectifying any mistake apparent on the face of the record. The Tribunal cannot re-adjudicate issues or modify its original order under the guise of rectification. Section 254(2) of the Indian Income Tax Act,...
Income Tax Act | CIT(A) Can't Remand Matter Back To AO Without Deciding Jurisdictional Validity Of S.144 Order: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals cannot remand assessment back to the Assessing Officer, unless it decides the jurisdictional validity of AO's order passed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act 1961.Section 144 empowers the deals with the assessment of a taxpayer that is carried out by the Assessing Officer (AO) as per his best judgement...
Income Tax Act | No Error In Issuing Successive Reassessment Notices On Same 'Reasons To Believe': Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with income reassessment action initiated by the tax authorities merely on the ground that two successive notices under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 were issued to the assessee.A division bench of Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar observed,“as the fresh notice dated 13.06.2025 was issued with the same contents, the...
Interpreting Property's 'Built-Up Area Wall-To-Wall' As Carpet Area Is Commercially Sound: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition under section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) filed by the Developer-partners of Lukhi Associates challenging a 2020 arbitral award arising out of disputes under a 2010 Development Agreement with the Saini family. Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan upheld the award, holding that “what the Learned Arbitral Tribunal...
Karnataka High Court Upholds Order Asking GoBoult To Add 'Formerly BOULT' Disclaimer In Rebranded Products
The Karnataka High Court has upheld an order directing a consumer electronics brand to prominently display the disclaimer “formerly BOULT” on all products sold under its new name “GoBoult,” saying the step was necessary to prevent confusion with rival brand “GoBold.”A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C M Poonacha delivered the order on November 24,...
Calcutta High Court Denies Interim Relief To Indian Importer In 'PL SUPREME' Trademark Row With Chinese Manufacturer
The Calcutta High Court has refused an interim injunction to Kolkata-based torch importer Parul Ruparelia and an associated entity in their trademark infringement and passing-off suit over the mark “PL SUPREME” against the Chinese manufacturers of the torch.It held that Chinese manufacturer Camme Wang and its associated entity are the prior adopters and owners of the...
Delhi High Court Awards ₹1.5 Lakh To Tommy Hilfiger Against Kolkata Trader Who Sold Fake Products
The Delhi High Court has recently held that a clear case of trademark infringement and passing off has been established against a Kolkata trader who was found supplying counterfeit Tommy Hilfiger products. A bench of Justice Tejas Karia delivered the judgment on November 28, 2025, holding that the use of Hilfiger's registered marks on fake goods had deceived consumers into believing there was...