High Court
[Arbitration Act] S.34 Pleas Are Of Commercial Nature, Cannot Be Decided By Bench Having Ordinary Original Jurisdiction: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court Bench of Justices Arijit Banerjee and Om Narayan Rai while deciding a Section 37, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) appeal, set aside an order passed in Section 34, ACA petition on the ground that the court passing it lacked the jurisdiction to pass such an order. The concerned judge had the power to determine only such applications under Section...
Commercial Courts Act Is Entity-Neutral In Terms Of Limitation; Govt Suffers Same Pitfalls As Private Entity: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court Division Bench, comprising Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and B.R. Madhusudhan Rao, observed that the Commercial Courts Act 2015 is an entity-neutral statute in terms of the limitation period. The Commercial Courts Act 2015 is in place to ensure the speedy resolution of high-stakes commercial disputes. Factual Matrix: The Telangana...
Calcutta High Court Upholds Arbitral Award In Favour Of Sourav Ganguly Over Termination Of Player Representation Agreement
The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Ravi Kishan Kapur dismissed a Section 34 petition filed against an arbitral award passed in favour of cricket player Sourav Ganguly (“Respondent”) by his former management agency, Precept Talent Management Ltd. (“Petitioner”). While upholding the Arbitral Award, the Court observed that the award was well reasoned and the views taken by...
Karnataka High Court Directs GST Department To Establish Tracking System For Notices Sent To Taxpayers Via Email
The Karnataka High Court has directed the GST department to establish tracking system for notices sent to the taxpayers via email Justice Suraj Govindaraj stated that it is required for the department to establish a system to ascertain delivery of e-mail notices, when the said e-mail was opened and when the email was read. In this case, the assessee/petitioner has challenged...
IGST Not Leviable On Secondment Of Employee From Overseas Group Companies: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court held that IGST is not leviable on secondment arrangement with overseas entities. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum was addressing the issue of whether a secondment constitutes a taxable supply of manpower services or a non-taxable employer-employee relationship exempt under Schedule III of the CGST Act. In this case, the during the period from July 2017 to...
GST Officers Issuing Summons/Arrest Memo Not Required To Be Cross-Examined By Assessee: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court held that GST officers issuing summons/arrest memo are not required to be cross-examined by assessee. Justices Bhargav D. Karia and Pranav Trivedi observed that the assessee wants to cross-examine the persons who belongs to the department who have either issued the summons or arrest memo. Such persons are not required to be cross-examined by...
Unauthenticated Documents From Foreign Govt Regarding Swiss Bank Account Of Assessee Can't Form Basis For Criminal Action: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against an assessee under Section 276C, 276D and 277 of the Income Tax Act 1961 merely on the basis of some unauthorised documents alleging existence of an undisclosed Swiss Bank account in his name.In doing so, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed,“Merely on some unauthenticated information received from a third Country...
Bombay High Court Directs GST Council To Develop Mechanism For Cross-State ITC Transfer In Mergers/Amalgamations
The Bombay High Court has directed the GST Council and GST Network to develop a mechanism for cross-state ITC transfer in Mergers/amalgamations. Justices Bharati Dangre and Nivedita P. Mehta permitted the IGST and CGST amount lying in the electronic credit ledger of the Transferor Company to be transferred to the Petitioner Company by physical mode for the time being, subject to...
Impleading Non-Signatory Against Whom No Cause Of Action Is Disclosed Does Not Defeat Reference To Arbitration: Calcutta High Court
The Division Bench of Calcutta High comprising Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Uday Kumar while deciding an appeal under Section 37, Arbitration and Conciliation Act (“ACA”) against the dismissal of an application for reference under Section 8, ACA observed that where a non-signatory party has been impleaded against whom no cause of action has been disclosed in the suit and who...
SARFAESI Act | Fresh Notice To Legal Heirs Of Borrower Not Necessary To Take Possession Under S.14: J&K High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court has held that a secured creditor is not required to issue a fresh notice to the legal heirs of a deceased borrower before invoking Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002.A Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar dismissed a writ...
S. 161 CGST Act | Adjudicating Authority Can Dismiss GST Rectification Application Without Personal Hearing: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court stated that the GST authority can dismiss the rectification application without a personal hearing. The issue before the bench was whether the third proviso to Section 161 of the TNGST Act, 2017, requires complying with the principles of natural justice even for dismissing a rectification petition. Section 161 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 talks...
Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked When Party Has Already Approached DRT Under SARFAESI Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition while upholding that if a borrower has already approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under the SARFAESI Act, for a one-time settlement, a writ seeking the same relief under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable. Background of the Case The petitioner has availed the credit facilities from the consortium of...

![[Arbitration Act] S.34 Pleas Are Of Commercial Nature, Cannot Be Decided By Bench Having Ordinary Original Jurisdiction: Calcutta High Court [Arbitration Act] S.34 Pleas Are Of Commercial Nature, Cannot Be Decided By Bench Having Ordinary Original Jurisdiction: Calcutta High Court](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2024/08/30/500x300_558478-calcutta-high-court.webp)









