![[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)
(CrPC) – Section 311 – The significant expression that occurs is “at any stage of any inquiry or trial or other proceeding under this Code”. It is, however, to be borne in mind that the discretionary power conferred under Section 311 CrPC has to be exercised judiciously, as it is always said “wider the power, greater is the necessity of caution while exercise of judicious discretion.”
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH V.N. PATIL — Appellant Vs. K. NIRANJAN KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indu Malhotra and Ajay Rastogi, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Nature of charges found against the respondent can hardly be one to call for a major penalty – There was no bribery charge – Anyone can make mistakes – Consequences of mistakes should not be unduly harsh – Compulsory retirement set-aside.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. P. BALASUBRAHMANAYAM — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. ) Civil…
Recruitment to public services – Where the recruitment to public employment stands vitiated as a consequence of systemic fraud or irregularities, the entire process becomes illegitimate.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SACHIN KUMAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICE SELECTION BOARD (DSSSB) AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud…
CPC – Compliance of proviso to Section 17 is a Precondition for maintainability of application under Order 9 Rule 13 – Application under Order 9 Rule 13 can be allowed only when sufficient cause is made out to set aside the ex parte decree
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUBODH KUMAR — Appellant Vs. SHAMIM AHMED — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos. 802-803…
If evidence on record clearly establishes that the deceased was murdered by the accused by using firearm, the factum of motive loses its importance, more so, in this case the motive has been established by leading cogent evidence to show that only because the deceased had developed relationship with accused’s wife, has decided to eliminate the deceased
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAHUL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 262…
Dying declaration – Deceased has suffered 90 per cent injuries and was in a fit condition to make a declaration – Deceased was tortured by the accused and his family members – Merely because family members were in the hospital, the same is no ground to disbelieve the dying declaration – Conviction upheld.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SATPAL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 261…
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34(3) – Period of limitation for filing objections would have to be reckoned from the date on which the signed copy of the award was made.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S NAVIGANT TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Indu Malhotra and Ajay Rastogi,…
Murder – Post-Mortem Report – No marks on the body which would suggest violence or struggle – In any case, the medical expert himself has not ruled out the possibility of suicidal death – Post-Mortem Report shows, that the cause of death was ‘asphyxia due to hanging’ – Appellant acquitted.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHIVAJI CHINTAPPA PATIL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman and B. R. Gavai, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 195 – No TDS applicable on Indian Companies for amount Paid to use Foreign Software.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before…
I B C, 2016 – S 14 – For the period of moratorium, since no Section 138/141 (NIA) proceeding can continue or be initiated against the corporate debtor because of a statutory bar, such proceedings can be initiated or continued against the persons mentioned in Section 141(1) and (2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH P. MOHANRAJ AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S. SHAH BROTHERS ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha and…