Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
In a commercial suit alleging continuing infringement of patent and design rights, the issue was whether the plaint "contemplates any urgent interim relief" under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act so as to dispense with pre-institution mediation despite delay in filing. The Court held that continuing manufacture, sale, or offer for sale constitutes a recurring cause of action, and mere delay does not legalise infringement or bar injunctive relief; urgency must be assessed from the plaint and annexed material showing ongoing injury, irreparable harm, and public interest in preventing deception, not by deciding merits. The High Court's approach treating delay as negating urgency was set aside; the impugned orders were quashed and the appeal allowed - SC
In a commercial suit alleging continuing infringement of patent and design rights, the issue was whether the plaint "contemplates any urgent interim relief" under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act so as to dispense with pre-institution mediation despite delay in filing. The Court held that continuing manufacture, sale, or offer for sale constitutes a recurring cause of action, and mere delay does not legalise infringement or bar injunctive relief; urgency must be assessed from the plaint and annexed material showing ongoing injury, irreparable harm, and public interest in preventing deception, not by deciding merits. The High Court's approach treating delay as negating urgency was set aside; the impugned orders were quashed and the appeal allowed - SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.