Judgements without assigned author

Scroll Down To Discover

Sort by:

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Pension Rules Case Regarding Withholding of Gratuity During Pending Criminal Proceedings. Court Upholds Statutory Embargo Under Rule 69(1)(c) of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, Holding That Gratuity Cannot Be Paid While Either Departmental or Judicial Proceedings Remain Pending....

The appeal concerned a retired government employee whose gratuity was withheld due to pending criminal proceedings against him. The appellant had worked for the Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corpora...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Quashes Summoning Order Against Director in Cheque Dishonour Case Under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Court held that mere directorship and signing of board resolution do not establish liability under Section 141 NI Act, as specific averments of being in charge of and responsible for company's business conduct are required....

The dispute arose from a cheque dishonour case under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, where the appellant, a director of Projtech Engineering Private Limited, was summoned...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Dishonoured Cheque Case Under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Restoring Complaint for Trial. The Court held that the presumption under Section 139 of the Act regarding legally enforceable debt is rebuttable only at trial, not at pre-trial stage, and the basic ingredients under Section 138 were prima facie satisfied....

The dispute arose from a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, by the appellant against the second respondent, who had issued a cheque for ₹50 crores as part of ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Income Tax Penalty Case — Typographical Error in Return Does Not Attract Penalty Under Section 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Bona Fide Claim for Exemption Based on Professional Advice Does Not Amount to Concealment or Furnishing of Inaccurate Particulars....

The appellant, Ms. Saritha Jain, an income tax assessee, sold her shares in M/s. Vision Health Services (P) Ltd., an Indian company, to M/s. Perot Systems Corporation, a US company, for a consideratio...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Upholds Demolition of Illegal Constructions on Water Bodies in Tamil Nadu. Court Directs Removal of Encroachments and Restoration of Water Bodies to Protect Environment and Public Interest Under Public Trust Doctrine and Article 21....

This batch of writ petitions was filed by various individuals and associations challenging the demolition of constructions on water bodies and river banks in Tamil Nadu, particularly in Coimbatore dis...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Assessee's Appeal in Income Tax Penalty Case — Typographical Error in Return Does Not Attract Penalty Under Section 271(1)(c). Bonafide belief and full disclosure of transaction negate mens rea for concealment....

The appellant, Ms. Saritha Jain, an income tax assessee, sold her shares in M/s. Vision Health Services (P) Ltd., an Indian company, to M/s. Perot Systems Corporation, a US company, for a consideratio...