HELD one transaction of sale of software and once it is accepted that the software put in the CD is ‘goods’, then there cannot be any separate service element in the transaction. We are saying so because even otherwise the user is put in possession and full control of the software. It amounts to ‘deemed sale’ which would not attract service tax.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX DELHI — Appellant Vs. QUICK HEAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ.…
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 191 – Perjury — False evidence — Affidavit — An affidavit is ‘evidence’ within the meaning of Section 191 of the IPC and a person swearing to a false affidavit is guilty of perjury.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before: A.M. Khanwilkar & J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 103 of 2009 Decided on: 14.07.2022 Himanshu Kumar and others – Petitioner(s) Versus State of…
Expression “District Magistrate” and the “Chief Metropolitan Magistrate” as appearing in Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act shall deem to mean and include Additional District Magistrate and Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for the purposes of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH M/S R.D. JAIN AND CO. — Appellant Vs. CAPITAL FIRST LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…
HELD arbitration proceedings earlier initiated in the Court at Vishakhapatnam only High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati would have jurisdiction to entertain the application under Section 11(6) of the Act and not Orrisa High court
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH GENERAL MANAGER EAST COAST RAILWAY RAIL SADAN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : M. R. Shah…
Rejection of candidature – RPF Constable – Candidate has used different language for filling up of the application form and the OMR answer book, therefore, his candidature was rightly rejected.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. MAHENDRA SINGH — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Prosecution can lead evidence only in accordance with the charge framed by the trial court – Where a higher charge is not framed for which there is evidence, the accused is entitled to assume that he is called upon to defend himself only with regard to the lesser offence
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH GHULAM HASSAN BEIGH — Appellant Vs. MOHAMMAD MAQBOOL MAGREY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, Abhay S. Oka and J.B. Pardiwala,…
HELD Anardana’ is a dried product of local ‘daru’ or wild pomegranate – well-settled principle that words in a taxing statute must be construed in consonance with their commonly accepted meaning in the trade and their popular meaning – Policy which specifically states – ‘import of pomegranate seeds will be free’
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, AMRITSAR (PUNJAB) — Appellant Vs. M/S D.L. STEELS ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and Bela…
SEBI – Appellate Tribunal is an appellate forum and not the authority empowered to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 15-H or suo moto issue directions under Section 11, 11B or 11(4)(d) of the Act. It can uphold or set aside the direction issued, or modify and substitute the direction issued under Regulation 44 of the Takeover Regulations 1997 read with Sections 11, 11B and 11(4)(d) of the Act.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. SUNIL KRISHNA KHAITAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M.…
It would not be safe and/or prudent to convict the accused solely on the basis of their identification for the first time in the Court – Conviction under Sections 302/34 and 392 of IPC is set aside.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH AMRIK SINGH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF PUNJAB — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 14(1) – There cannot be a fetter in a owner of a property to give a limited estate if he so chooses to do including to his wife but of course if the limited estate is to the wife for her maintenance that would mature in an absolute estate under Section 14(1) of the said Act.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JOGI RAM — Appellant Vs. SURESH KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…








