Digest Of Supreme Court Cases

Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 — Rr. 6(b)(i) and 6(b)(ii) — Valuation — Captive consumption of goods

Principles clarified relating to approach to be adopted for determination of normal price and determination of applicability of R. 6(b)(i) or (ii) of the 1975 Rules. Held, Having considered the records and the submissions of the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be faulted. This Court in its judgment

Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 — Rr. 6(b)(i) and 6(b)(ii) — Valuation — Captive consumption of goods Read More »

Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302, 376 & 201 — Brutal rape and murder of minor — Death sentence

The heinous nature of crime like that of present one, in brutal rape and murder of a seven-year-old girl child, definitely discloses aggravating circumstances, particularly when the manner of its commission shows depravity and shocks the conscience. But at the same time, it is noticeable that the appellant has no criminal antecedents, comes from a

Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302, 376 & 201 — Brutal rape and murder of minor — Death sentence Read More »

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 427 — Consecutive or concurrent running of sentences

Normal rule is that such subsequent sentence shall run consecutively. However, court has discretion under S. 427(1) to direct that subsequent sentence shall run concurrently. Held, Section 427 provides that when a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment is sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment or imprisonment for life, such imprisonment or imprisonment for

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 427 — Consecutive or concurrent running of sentences Read More »

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 319 — Summoning of additional accused

Principles summarized relating to parameters for summoning of additional accused under this section. The parameters on which additional accused could be summoned in an application filed under Section 319 CrPC are well settled in the case of Hardeep Singh and Ors.’s case (supra) which are as under: “105. Power u/s 319 CrPC is a discretionary

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 319 — Summoning of additional accused Read More »

Income Tax Act, 1961 — S. 2(15) [as amended in 2008 and then by the Finance Act, 2011 (w.e.f. 1-4-2012) and the Finance Act, 2015 (w.e.f. 1-4-2016)]

Conditions required to be satisfied, for entitlement to exemption vis-à-vis charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility (GPU), explained. Law clarified relating to when and extent to which trade, commerce, or business or any services in relation thereto is permissible by GPU. Application of Interpretation: At the cost of repetition,

Income Tax Act, 1961 — S. 2(15) [as amended in 2008 and then by the Finance Act, 2011 (w.e.f. 1-4-2012) and the Finance Act, 2015 (w.e.f. 1-4-2016)] Read More »

Companies Act, 1956 — S. 111-A — [Corresponding to S. 59 of the Companies Act, 2013] — Rectificatory jurisdiction — Nature and scope

The provisions re the exercise of rectificatory powers of a Board/Company Court under S. 38 of the Companies Act, 1913, then under S. 155 of the 1956 Act, followed by S. 111-A introduced by the 1996 Amendment to the 1956 Act, and finally, S. 59 of the 2013 Act, held, demonstrate that its essential ingredients

Companies Act, 1956 — S. 111-A — [Corresponding to S. 59 of the Companies Act, 2013] — Rectificatory jurisdiction — Nature and scope Read More »

CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 — R. 54(14)(b) — Family pension

Although Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act entitles widow of a government servant to adopt a son/daughter, but rights and entitlements of such adopted son/daughter as available under Hindu Law against his/her adoptive family, would not be available as against deceased government servant, under the 1972 Rules. Held, The entitlement of such a posthumous child is

CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 — R. 54(14)(b) — Family pension Read More »

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — S. 2(2): Female member of Scheduled Tribe (ST) is not entitled to share by survivorship in compensation awarded for acquisition of ancestral land in view of non-applicability of the HSA, 1956 to STs

Her claim of equal share with male coparceners in joint family property may be supportable in equity but cannot be sustained under S. 2(2) of the HSA, 1956 as it stands.   Held, Before parting, we may observe that there may not be any justification to deny the right of survivorship so far as the

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — S. 2(2): Female member of Scheduled Tribe (ST) is not entitled to share by survivorship in compensation awarded for acquisition of ancestral land in view of non-applicability of the HSA, 1956 to STs Read More »

error: Content is protected !!

Terms And Condition

The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:

  1. The user wishes to gain more information about Re Legal, its practice areas for his/her own information and use
  2. That the information provided in the website is only for personal use or reference of the visitor and is provided only on his/her specific request.
  3. That the material available for downloading on the website and other information provided on the website would not create any lawyer-client relationship.
  4. That we are not responsible for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material/information provided under this website.
  5. That in case the visitor has any legal issues; he or she should seek independent legal advice.

The information provided under this website is for informational purposes only and solely available at your request. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertising.