Supreme Court of India Judgements

47020 Judgements hosted as on 04/01/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Top Tags

Latest Post

Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias. The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils. Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29) Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2) Service Law — High Court Staff — Regularization — Discrimination — Appellants (Operator-cum-Data Entry Assistants/Routine Grade Clerks) appointed by Chief Justice under Rules 8(a)(i), 41, and 45 of Allahabad High Court Officers and Staff (Conditions of Service and Conduct) Rules, 1976 — High Court refused regularization of Appellants while regularizing numerous similarly situated employees appointed through the same channel — Justification based on whether initial appointment was labelled ‘ad-hoc’ or whether appointment letter stipulated an examination — Held, distinction based solely on stipulations in appointment letters, when the channel of appointment and nature of work are identical, is arbitrary, unreasonable, and superficial — Such differential treatment violates Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution, as equals must be treated equally without rational differentia. (Paras 3, 4, 17, 23-28)
Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.
Education
Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.
The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.
State Laws
The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.
Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)
Direct Taxation Income Tax Act
Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)
Evidence Act
Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)
Corporate

Preventive Detention–Once it is found that the detention order contains many grounds, even if one of them is to be rejected, principle of segregation contained in Section 5A gets attracted—Grounds are referred to as ‘materials on which the order of detention is primarily based’-

Apr 27, 2017 sclaw

2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 133 : 2017 LawHerald.Org 512 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri  The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre                                            …

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article – 32, 21 – Environment Protection Act, 1986 – Rule 5(3)(d), 3(1), 3(2)(v) – Public interest litigation – There is a challenge to the validity of the Notification dated 18.8.1994 – The main grievance in this petition is that a Notification dated 19.2.1991 declaring coastal stretches as Coastal Regulation Zones which regulates the activities in the zones has not been implemented or enforced

Apr 27, 2017 sclaw

  (1996) 3 AD 641 : (1996) 4 JT 263 : (1998) 4 SCALE 11 : (1996) 3 SCALE 579 : (1996) 2 SCALE 44 : (1996) 5 SCC 281…

Service Matters
Service

Regularisation of the services — The Respondents appear to have approached the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal at Jabalpur in appeal, which was dismissed by the Tribunal holding that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the same as the Respondents were not employees/civil servants under the State Government —

Apr 27, 2017 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONTROLLER, GOVT. PRINT. AND STATIONERY PRESS AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. RASHIDA B. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vikramajit Sen, J; T.S. Thakur,…

Corporate

Central Excise Tariff – Item 26AA(ia), 25(8) – Classification of elastic rail clips – Learned Counsel for the appellant that a Special Bench of five members of Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal has considered the same question and taken the view in favour of the assessee that elastic rail clips are classifiable under Item 26AA(ia)/25(8)

Apr 27, 2017 sclaw

  (1998) 77 ECR 439 : (1997) 92 ELT 5 : (1998) 4 JT 439 : (1997) 8 SCC 483 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA VEE KAY INDUSTRIES — Appellant Vs.…

Bail Granted

Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 – Sections 5, 6 and 9 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 323, 504, 117, 366A and 373 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Sections 437(5) and 439(2) – Rescue of young girls and children from red light area – Challenge to order passed by High Court whereby bail was granted to respondent –

Apr 27, 2017 sclaw

  (2010) CriLJ 1433 : (2009) 14 JT 37 : (2009) 15 SCC 75 : (2009) 11 SCR 761 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA GURIA, SWAYAM SEVI SANSTHAN — Appellant Vs.…

You missed

Education

Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
State Laws

The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Direct Taxation Income Tax Act

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw
Evidence Act

Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw