When an amount is paid as Dharmada along with the sale price of goods, such payment is not made in consideration of the transfer of goods – Such payment is meant for charity and is received and held in trust by the seller – If such amounts are meant to be credited to charity and do not form part of the income of the assessee they cannot be included in the transaction value or assessable value of the goods
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S D.J. MALPANI — Appellant Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NASHIK — Respondent ( Before : S.A. Bobde, Deepak Gupta and Vineet Saran, JJ.…
The present case has been tagged with the case of M/s D.J. Malpani vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik which has been referred to this Bench vide order dated 29.07.2015. We have held that the amount of Dharmada cannot be included in the transaction value for the purposes of assessments.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, BANGALORE — Appellant Vs. M/S JSW STEEL LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS JINDAL VIJAYANAGAR STEEL LTD.) — Respondent ( Before :…
Criminal Law–Murder–Suspension of sentence pending appeal– The mere fact that during the period when the accused persons were on bail during trial there was no misuse of liberties, does not per se warrant suspension of execution of sentence and grant of bail–What really was necessary to be considered by the High Court is whether reasons existed to suspend the execution of sentence and thereafter grant bail
2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 636 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Asok Kumar Ganguly Criminal Appeal No. of 2009…
Bail–High Court arrived at a definite conclusion about non-possibility of the injuries having been sustained in the manner indicated by prosecution–High Court should not have recorded such finding while considering bail application.
2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 634 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mukundakam Sharma Criminal Appeal No. of 2009 (Arising…
Second Appeal–Suit for injunction and possession–First appellate Court concluded that plaintiff is the owner of property–However, High Court is second appeal overlooked the conclusions of First Appellate Court–Matter remanded to High Court for fresh consideration.
2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 631 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Mukundakam Sharma Civil Appeal No. 258…
Rape–Suicide–Dying declaration–There are several inconsistencies and contradictions–Eye-witnesses examined by the prosecution i.e. PWs 13 and 15 who happen to be the brother and the friend of the deceased did not support the prosecution version and resiled from their statement made during investigation–Acquittal upheld
2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 629 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mukundakam Sharma Criminal Appeal No. 352…
Arbitrator–Appointment of –Former Chief Justice of India resigned as arbitrator stating that issues involved in arbitration were similar to issues involved in earlier award passed by him–New arbitration a retired Judge of High Court appointed as arbitrator–Petitioner alleged that since former CJI was appointed to arbitrate, this time also former CJI ought to have been appointed–Objection of petitioner cannot be sustained.
2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 626 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee Arbitration Petition No. 7 of 2006 Balli Petrochemicals Limited. v. National Aluminium…
High Court was not justified in passing orders from time to time to secure presence of the officers. The officers of the State discharge public functions and duties. The orders are generally presumed to be passed in good faith unless proved otherwise. The officers pass orders as a custodian of public money. Therefore, merely because an order has been passed, it does not warrant their personal presence. The summoning of officers to the court to attend proceedings, impinges upon the functioning of the officers and eventually it is the public at large who suffer on account of their absence from the duties assigned to them. The practice of summoning officers to court is not proper and does not serve the purpose of administration of justice
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRI N.K. JANU, DEPUTY DIRECTOR SOCIAL FORESTARY DIVISION, AGRA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. LAKSHMI CHANDRA — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul…
Trial court, committed a patent error in discarding the dying declaration and the other material evidence, discussed hereinabove. Therefore, the interference by the High Court in the appeal against the acquittal of the appellant and recording the finding of his conviction for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC, on consideration of the evidence, is justified.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VIJAY MOHAN SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and M.R. Shah, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 11 and 11(6A) – Arbitration Clause – Insufficiently stamped – Court can’t appoint arbitrator when the Contract containing arbitration clause is insufficiently stamped.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GARWARE WALL ROPES LTD — Appellant Vs. COASTAL MARINE CONSTRUCTIONS AND ENGINEERING LTD — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman and Vineet Saran, JJ.…