Supreme Court of India Judgements

46468 Judgements hosted as on 12/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Direct Taxation

Direct Taxation

Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 80-IA(5) – is limited to determination of quantum of deduction under sub-section (1) of Section 80-IA of the Act by treating ‘eligible business’ as the ‘only source of income’ – Sub-section (5) cannot be pressed into service for reading a limitation of the deduction under sub-section (1) only to ‘business income’.

May 2, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I — Appellant Vs. M/S. RELIANCE ENERGY LIMITED (FORMERLY BSES LIMITED) THROUGH ITS M.D — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara…

Direct Taxation

Third proviso to Section 254(2A) of the Income Tax Act will now be read without the word “even” and the words “is not” after the words “delay in disposing of the appeal” – Any order of stay shall stand vacated after the expiry of the period or periods mentioned in the Section only if the delay in disposing of the appeal is attributable to the assessee.

Apr 10, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S. PEPSI FOODS LTD. (NOW PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.) — Respondent ( Before…

Direct Taxation

Deduction – Co-operative Societies – Limited object of section 80P(4) is to exclude co-operative banks that function at par with other commercial banks HELD the primary object of which is to provide financial accommodation to its members for agricultural purposes or for purposes connected with agricultural activities.

Jan 17, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE MAVILAYI SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CALICUT AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R.…

Direct Taxation

I Tax Act, 1961 – S 40(a)(iib) – CoI, 1950 – Art 226 – VAT expenditure is not allowable as deduction – When the vires of S 40(a)(iib) of the I T Act were challenged, which can be decided by the High Court alone in exercise of powers under Art 226, the H C ought to have decided the issue with regard to vires of S 40(a)(iib) on merits, irrespective of the fact whether the matter was sub judice before the Income Tax Authority

Nov 29, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S TAMIL NADU STATE MARKETING CORPORATION LIMITED — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash…

Direct Taxation

Advance Tax Ruling System – Aim of any properly framed advance ruling system ought to be a dialogue between taxpayers and revenue authorities to fulfil the mutually beneficial purpose for taxpayers and revenue authorities HELD Swedish model and the New Zealand system may be a possible way forward.

Sep 12, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NATIONAL CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — Appellant Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-V — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Indu Malhotra,…

Direct Taxation

Wealth-Tax Act, 1957 – Sections 21AA and 167A – Club Rules – Rule 35 – Liability to pay Wealth Tax – Section 21AA does not enlarge the field of tax payers but only plugs evasion -applying the ratio of CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s Family 108 ITR 555 (1977), HELD club members fixed body as on the date of liquidation. Appeal allowed.

Sep 9, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S BANGALORE CLUB — Appellant Vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX AND ANOTHER — RespondentS ( Before : R. F. Nariman, Navin Sinha…

Direct Taxation

Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 45 – Capital gain – Assessment year 1975-1976 – Capital gains arising out of land acquisition compensation were chargeable to income-tax under Section 45 of the Act of 1961 for the previous year referable to the date of award of compensation i.e., 29.09.1970 and not the date of notification for acquisition.

Aug 25, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RAJ PAL SINGH — Appellant Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, HARYANA, ROHTAK — Respondent ( Before : A.M.Khanwilkar, Hemant Gupta and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ.…

Direct Taxation

Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 194C – Tax Deduction at Source – Applicability of Section 194C – Question of TDS under Section 194C(2) would have arisen only if the payment was made to a “sub-contractor” and that too, in pursuance of a contract for the purpose of “carrying whole or any part of work undertaken by the contractor” Appeal dismissed.

Jul 29, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHREE CHOUDHARY TRANSPORT COMPANY — Appellant Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 376(2)(g) and 506(1) – Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act, 1998 – Section 4 – Gang Rape – The victim’s testimony, along with her mother and aunt’s statements, was consistent with the initial complaint and corroborated by medical evidence – The defense argued that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – Whether the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies were not significant and did not affect the overall credibility of the evidence – The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The court rejected the defense’s argument that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant and rejected the defence’s arguments regarding inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Dismissal of Civil Suit – Condonation of delay – Standing to file an application – The court clarified that only parties to a suit or those who have accrued a right in the lis can file an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the suit. A stranger to the proceedings cannot file such an application.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Haryana Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 – Section 3(1)(b) – State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 – Section 29 – The appeals arise from a High Court judgment regarding the recovery of time-barred debts under the Act, 1979, and the Act, 1951 – The main issue is whether a debt time-barred under the Limitation Act can be recovered using the aforementioned Acts – The appellants argued that time-barred debts cannot be recovered under the Recovery of Dues Act, citing the precedent set in V.R. Kalliyanikutty – The respondents argued that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act allow for time-barred debt recovery, as they only bar the remedy, not the right – The court examined whether the Recovery of Dues Act creates a new right for creditors and allows for time-barred debt recovery – The court discussed the distinction between a debt and the right of action for its recovery, noting that the statute of limitation bars the latter but not the former – The court concluded that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act provide an alternative mechanism for recovering debts, even if they are time-barred – Matter needs to be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India to constitute an appropriate three-judge bench.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Policy Claim – The appellants, family of the deceased, filed a complaint after the LIC repudiated their claim on a policy following the policyholder’s accidental death – The main issue was whether there was a concluded contract between the deceased and LIC at the time of his death, which would obligate LIC to pay the insurance benefits – The appellants argued that LIC had accepted the first premium and issued a receipt, thereby assuming risk and concluding the contract before the policyholder’s death – LIC contended that the policy was not communicated to the deceased and was blocked due to his demise, implying no concluded contract existed – The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s order, restored the District Forum’s order in favor of the appellants, and directed LIC to pay the insurance benefits as per the policy terms – The Court found clear presumption of acceptance of the policy by LIC, as the first premium receipt indicated the corporation was on risk from the receipt date – The Court relied on precedents that establish the principles of insurance contracts and the obligations of good faith expected from insurers – The Supreme Court concluded that LIC had indeed entered into a contract with the policyholder before his death, and thus, was liable to pay the insurance benefits to the appellants.

May 12, 2024 sclaw