Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). ____________OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) No.22921/2019) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) CIRCLE12) ...APPELLANT (S) VERSUS M/S. M. R. SHAH LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. Special leave granted. With consent of counsel for parties, the appeal was heard finally. The Commissioner of Income tax (hereafter the revenue) appeals against a judgment of the Gujarat High Court1, which quashed a notice issued under Section 147/148, Income Tax Act (hereafter the Act) seeking to re-open the respondents assessment, for the assessment year (AO) 2010-11. The respondent is hereafter, referred to as the assessee.2. The facts are that search proceedings were conducted- by the revenue, under the Act, at the office premises of one Shirish Chandrakant Shah on 09.04.2013 at Mumbai; during the course of the search, several materials- and documents, wer...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2104 of 2009 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS MEGA CORPORATION LIMITED .RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.1. This is a statutory appeal under Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 19921 against the final order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal2, by which the Tribunal has set aside the order passed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India3 restricting the respondent- company from accessing the capital market for one year and further restraining the promoter directors from buying, selling or otherwise dealing with securities for India. While dismissing the appeal, we have explained that the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Section 15Z is confined to question of law. 1 hereinafter referred to as the Act. 2 hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal. 3 hereinafter referred to as SEBI or the Board. Page 1 of 242. M/s Meg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4795 OF2021M/S PAHWA PLASTICS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. ... Appellants Versus DASTAK NGO AND ORS. .. Respondents JUDGMENT INDIRA BANERJEE, J.This appeal under Section 22 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, is against an order dated 3rd June 2021 passed by the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in O.A No.287/2020 at New Delhi, inter alia, holding that establishments such as the manufacturing units of the Appellants, which did not have prior Environmental Clearance (EC) could not be allowed to operate.2. The question of law involved in this appeal is, whether an establishment employing about 8000 workers, which has been set up pursuant to Consent to Establish (CTE) and Consent to Operate (CTO) from the concerned statutory authority and has applied for ex post facto EC can be closed down pending issuance of EC, even though it 1 may not cause pollution and/or may be found to comply with t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1326-1327 of 2010 THE SUB REGISTRAR ERNAKULAM KOCHI16APPELLANT(S) VERSUS K. SYED ALI KADAR PILLAI & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material placed on record, we find no reason to consider interference in the impugned judgment dated 02.04.2008, particularly in view of the facts that the sale in question took place under the supervision of the Company Court and even when the auction bid of the respondent had been Rs. 1.935 crores for the assets under sale, the Company Court had fixed the value of immovable property therein at Rs. 1.4 crores; and the District Registrar was also satisfied with that valuation. Therefore, stamp duty was to be collected only on the said valuation i.e., Rs. 1.4 crores. The impugned judgment, essentially proceeding on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, calls for no interference. The appeals stand di...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.852 OF2018SARTAJ KHAN .. Appellant VERSUS STATE OF UTTARAKHAND .. Respondent JUDGMENT UDAY UMESH LALIT, J.1. This appeal under Section 379 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 is directed against the judgment and order dated 07.12.2017 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Government Appeal No.139 of 2016.2. The case of the prosecution as set out in the judgment under appeal was as under: 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that at 11:00 AM, S.I. Manju Pandey, In-charge Human Trafficking Unit Shadra Bairaj, Banbasa along with other police officials reached at Sharda Bairaj near Indo-Nepal border towards eastern side to check the illicit human 2 trafficking. One volunteer namely Meera Sauda was also with them. They were checking the people coming from Nepal b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
[REPORTABLE]. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1892 OF2022M/s. Vaishno Enterprises ..Appellant Versus Hamilton Medical AG & Anr. ..Respondents JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad in Writ Appeal No.201 of 2021 by which the High Court has dismissed the said appeal and has confirmed the order passed by the learned Single Judge quashing the IntimationcumNotice dated 22.10.2020 and Notices dated 04.11.2020 and 12.11.2020 issued by Micro and Small Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council 1 (hereinafter referred to as the Council), the original applicant has preferred the present appeal.2. That the appellant is a registered partnership consultant which provides consultancy services to foreign medical equipment companies in the form of liaisoning services with hospitals and government departments and entities for procurement of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.40111 OF2022(APPLICATION FOR DIRECTIONS) IN MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No.1805 OF2021IN WRIT PETITION (C) No.539 OF2021Gaurav Kumar Bansal Petitioner (s) Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondent(s)/ Applicant(s) ORDER M.R. SHAH, J.1. Present application is preferred by the Union of India- Ministry of Home Affairs with the following prayers:- (a) Modify the order dated 30.06.2021 and other subsequent orders passed by this Honble Court in the captioned matter permitting any central agency to undertake a sample scrutiny to verify the claimed documents processed by respective State Governments for grant of ex gratia payment and take steps thereafter in accordance with the law. 1 (b) Modify the order dated 30.06.2021 and other subsequent orders passed by this Honble Court in the captioned matter to the extent of declaring time limit of four weeks, from the date of order passed by this Honble Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 16251627 OF2021UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS S. RANJIT SAMUEL & ORS. ETC. ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. The short question that falls for consideration in the present appeals is, as to whether the respondentsemployees would be governed by the Assured Career Progression Scheme, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the ACP Scheme) or by the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the MACP Scheme). 12. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the present appeals are as under:3. The respondentsemployees were working as Junior Engineers/Lower Division Clerks at the relevant point of time. Taking into consideration the fact that the employees were stagnated on a particular post for a prolonged period on account of nonavailability of promotional post, the appellant Union of India, in order to give relief to such employees, brought into effect ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1951 OF2022The State of Gujarat and others Appellants Versus R.J.Pathan and others Respondents JUDGMENT M.R. SHAH, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 18.02.2021 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Letters Patent Appeal (for short, LPA) No.2082/2011, by which the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the said LPA and directed the State to consider the cases of the respondents for regularisation sympathetically and if necessary, by creating supernumerary posts, the State has preferred the present appeal.2. The facts leading to the present appeal in a nut-shell are as under: That the respondents herein were appointed on contractual basis for a period of eleven months on a fixed salary and on a particular project, namely, Post-Earthquake Redevelopment Programme of the 1 Government of Gujarat. That the respondents herein were initially ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1913 OF2022(Arising out of SLP (C) No.26763 OF2015 DINESH CHANDRA SHUKLA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF U.P. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J.1. Aggrieved by the dismissal of his writ petition seeking to quash an order of the Chancellor of the Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapeeth University (hereinafter referred to as the University), rejecting his request to be appointed as Lecturer (Karm Kand), the appellant is before this Court.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned counsel appearing for the Chancellor of the University, the learned 1 counsel for University itself and the learned standing counsel for the State.3. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the above appeal are as follows: (i) Vide order dated 22.10.1996, the State of U.P sanctioned one post of Lecturer in Karm Kand in the Department of Sanskrit in the University, which is arrayed as the 5t...
Tag this Judgment!