![[MPID Act, S. 2(c) & 2(d)] – Amounts advanced with promise of return and interest qualify as “deposit” accepted by “financial establishment” under the Act. – Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 Section 2(c) and Section 2(d) — Deposit and Financial Establishment — Amounts advanced to individuals with promise of repayment with interest constitute a “deposit” under Section 2(c) and the recipients are “financial establishments” under Section 2(d) of the MPID Act, irrespective of the transaction being termed as a “loan” — The nomenclature of the transaction is not determinative; the essential attributes of the transaction are key.](https://i0.wp.com/sclaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/State-Laws.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
![[Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, S. 3] – No State can levy VAT on inter-State sales; taxation power for inter-State trade vests exclusively with the Union. – Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 269 — Taxes on sale or purchase of goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce — Levied and collected by Union but assigned to States — Parliament’s power to formulate principles for determining when such sale/purchase takes place — State legislature’s power restricted to intra-State sales.](https://i0.wp.com/sclaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Constitution-of-India.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
Following Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and Ors.; (2020) 8 SCC 129 matter remitted to HC to decide whether the acquisition proceedings have lapsed under new act of 2013
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. (BPCL) AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. NISAR AHMED GANAI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna…
Sections 409, 467, 468 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Further investigations – misappropriation of stocks worth Rs. 16,99,648/- – HELD entire matter is left open for examination by the investigating agency, by the sanctioning authority, and by the Court concerned at the relevant stage and in accordance with law.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEVENDRA NATH SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Criminal…
West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1940 West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006 – Appellant Society to proceed further with its project of redevelopment in accordance with the resolutions passed by the General Body from time to time. It is needless to clarify that the first priority should be given to demolish the entire building as the same is in a dilapidated condition.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE BENGAL SECRETARIAT COOPERATIVE LAND MORTGAGE BANK AND HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. — Appellant Vs. SRI ALOKE KUMAR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before :…
Sections 498-A, 302 and 120-B IPC – falsehood cooked up by the witnesses (regarding illness and hospitalisation of the victim) and readily accepted by the appellant coupled with the undischarged burden of Section 106 of the Evidence Act provide such strong links in this matter that the chain of circumstances is complete, leading to the conclusion on the guilt of the appellant beyond any doubt.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MD. ANOWAR HUSSAIN — Appellant Vs. STATE OF ASSAM — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…
Gift Tax Act, 1958, Wealth Tax Act, 1957 – Part C of Schedule III – Method of valuation of shares and debentures of a company – that the equity shares under the lock-in period were not “quoted shares”, for the simple reason that the shares in the lock-in period were not quoted in any recognised stock exchange with regularity from time to time.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II — Appellant Vs. M/S BPL LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ.…
Title Suit – Adverse possession – Once the plaintiffs are not found to be the owner, they cannot claim their title by way of adverse possession – Their possession over the land in question can only be in the nature of an encroacher – No injunction
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KESAR BAI — Appellant Vs. GENDA LAL AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…
Ss 4 & 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) – signature of the defendant on the pro-note has been established and proved by plaintiff – there is a presumption of consideration in the negotiable instrument albeit the same may be rebutted – no rebuttal evidence is led by the defendant – Suit decreed
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KAPIL KUMAR — Appellant Vs. RAJ KUMAR — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 5854 of…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 r/w 34 – Murder – Appeal against acquittal – even in the case of some contradictions with respect to timing of lodging the FIR/complaint cannot be a ground to acquit the accused when the prosecution case is based upon the deposition of eye witness
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Appellant Vs. LALY @ MANIKANDAN & ANOTHER ETC. — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna…
Madhya Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2002 – Sections 14 and 46(1) – Rebate of Input tax – High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the Assessment Order denying the Input rebate against which a statutory appeal would be available under Section 46(1) of the MP VAT Act, 2002.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S COMMERCIAL ENGINEERS AND BODY BUILDING COMPANY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : M.R.…
Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 – Section 40(1)(a) – Exemption from certain taxes, fees and duties – a member of the society executing the document in his own capacity or in the capacity of a Guardian or a minor shall not be entitled to the benefit of remission of stamp duty.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KERALA LAND REFORMS & DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah…