S. 149 Income Tax Act | Reassessment Beyond Limitation Period Is Valid Where 'Bogus' Royalty Payments Exceed ₹50 Lakh: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has stated that reassessment beyond 3 years is valid where bogus royalty expenses exceed Rs. 50 lakhs. Justices Bharati Dangre and Nivedita P. Mehta upheld the reassessment proceedings initiated beyond three years, in the present case, where the alleged bogus royalty expenses exceeded 50 Lakhs. The bench opined that Section 149(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act is...

Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 8 to September 14, 2025

Nominal Index [Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 360 to 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 368]Pravin Nathalal Parch vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 360Farooq Shaukat Bagwan vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 361TATA AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Vinay Sah, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 362Amit Sunarlal Shahu vs Hare Madhav Electronics, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 363Sruti Vijaykumar vs Falgun Yogendra...

'Workers Can't Be Denied Permanent Status Merely Due To Unavailability Of Sanctioned Posts': Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that workmen who have completed the requisite period of continuous service cannot be denied permanent status merely on the ground that sanctioned posts are unavailable. The Court emphasised that such a denial would amount to continued exploitation of the workers, contrary to welfare legislation and the mandate of social justice.Justice Milind N. Jadhav was hearing...

Relief For Bajaj Allianz As Bombay High Court Quashes State Notice Demanding ₹374 Crore For Crop Insurance

The Bombay High Court recently quashed and set aside notices issued by the Maharashtra government to Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Corporation (BAGIC) demanding it to pay Rs 374 crores to the farmers in Osmanabad for the loss of their soybean crops due to 'unseasonal rains' categorised as 'localised calamity' under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna (PM Yojna).The State had signed...

[Representation Of Peoples Act] 'Election Candidates Must Only Disclose Convictions Resulting In Imprisonment Of One Year Or More': Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court has held that election candidates are required to disclose only those convictions that have resulted in imprisonment of one year or more. The Court read down Entry 6 of Form 26 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, to bring it in line with Section 33A(1)(ii) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, which mandates such disclosure.Justice R.I. Chagla was...

'No Inherent Right Of Hearing': Bombay HC Dismisses Plea Challenging CCI's Order To Probe Asian Paints For Alleged Abuse Of Dominance

The Bombay High Court has held that a party has no inherent right of oral or written hearing at the stage where the Competition Commission of India (CCI) forms a prima facie opinion under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002. The Court clarified that the order at this stage is administrative in nature, and whether to afford a hearing lies within the discretion of the CCI.A Division Bench...

Right Of Appeal Is Not A Fundamental Right, Legislature Can Designate Appellate Forum Based On Offence: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that the right to appeal is a statutory right and not a fundamental, and thus the legislature can decide the appellate forum based on the subject matter of offences."As to the contention that the accused loses one appellate forum, this Court finds it without merit. The right of appeal is not a fundamental right; it is purely a statutory right created by...

Non-Disbursal Of Sanctioned Loan Does Not Amount To Abetment To Suicide: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court bench at Aurangabad recently held that merely because the finance company did not disburse a sanctioned loan amount for want of procedural requirements and/or demanded processing fees or took one instalment in advance, and the loan applicant commits suicide, the said firm or its employees, then cannot be booked for abetment of his suicide or defamation.A division bench...

[SEBI Act] Exoneration In Regulatory Proceedings Only Bars Prosecution When There Is Finding Of Innocence: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that discharge from prosecution under the SEBI Act cannot be claimed merely on the ground that an adjudicating officer of SEBI has not imposed a penalty or passed any adverse directions. The Court ruled that exoneration in regulatory proceedings will bar criminal prosecution only when there is a clear and categorical finding of innocence on the merits, and...

Tax Liability Under JDA Arises Only Upon Conveyance Of Property, Not On Execution Of Agreement: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court held that tax liability under JDA (joint development agreement) arises only upon conveyance of property, not on execution of agreement. The bench consists of Justices Bharati Dangre and Nivedita P. Mehta stated that no liability actually fell upon the assessee at the time when JDA was entered into, as the liability arises only upon the conveyance of...

After Delhi HC, Bombay High Court Also Vacated Over Bomb Threat

Update: Court returned to normalcy at about 3pm with some benches resuming hearings.The Bombay High Court on Friday noon received a Bomb threat after which the court premises were vacated resulting in judges rising from the court even before the lunch break.Initially, the bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad, sitting in the central court, abruptly left the...

Right To Travel Abroad Can't Be Curtailed Solely On Grounds Of Pending Tax Prosecution: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has stated that facing tax prosecution does not automatically bar an accused from foreign travel. Justice S.M. Modak stated that, "It is true right to travel abroad is recognized as a fundamental right. Merely because a person is facing with prosecution, it does not mean that he cannot travel abroad till the time the investigation is under progress or criminal...