Delhi High Court
Proceedings Under IBC Doesn't Exclude Court Jurisdiction To Entertain Section 11 A&C Applications: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Sachin Datta held that proceedings contemplated in Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) do not expressly exclude the jurisdiction of the court or authorities to entertain applications under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act or other proceedings initiated by the corporate debtor against another party. It held that even if...
Requirement Of Pre-litigation Mediation Under Section 12-A Of Commercial Courts Act Is Mandatory: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Prateek Jalan held that the requirement of pre-litigation meditation under Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is mandatory in nature. Section 12-A of the Act outlines the mandatory requirement for pre-institution mediation before filing a suit, provided urgent interim relief is not sought. The Central Government may...
Confessional Statement Of Co-Accused Under Section 50 Of PMLA Not Substantive Piece Of Evidence, Can Be Used Only For Corroboration: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has said that the confessional statement of a co-accused under Section 50 of Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, is not a substantive piece of evidence and can be used only for corroboration in support of other evidence to lend assurance to the Court in arriving at a conclusion of guilt.Justice Vikas Mahajan reiterated that the statements of the witnesses recorded...
Go Air RP Unable To Undertake Regular Maintenance Of Lessors' Aircrafts: Delhi High Court Issues Show Cause Notice For Contempt
The Delhi High Court has issued a show cause notice to the Resolution Professional (RP) of crisis-hit Go Air as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him, observing that he was unable to undertake regular maintenance of the aircrafts of various lessors in terms of last year's judicial orders.Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju observed that the directions to provide access and inspection...
Failure To Consider Reply On Merits; Delhi High Court Quashes GST Demand Against Max Healthcare
The Delhi High Court has quashed the GST demand of Rs. 8.23 crore against Max Healthcare.The bench of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Ravinder Dudeja has observed that a proper officer had to at least consider the reply on merits and then form an opinion as to whether the reply was devoid of merits. The proper officer merely held that the reply was devoid of merit, which shows that...
Regressive To Mention Only Father's Name In Educational Certificates & Degrees, Names Of Both Parents Must Be Reflected: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that there is no reasonable justification for only mentioning name of the father in degrees and educational certificates issued to students. “It would be clearly retrogressive if educational certificates, degrees and other such documents reflect the name only of the father of a candidate, eliminating the name of the mother. The names of both parents...
Delhi High Court Directs GST Dept. To Pay 6% Interest For Delayed IGST Refund
The Delhi High Court has directed the GST department to pay 6% interest on delayed IGST refund.The bench of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Ravinder Dudeja has observed that Section 56 of the CGST/DGST Act deals with the interest on delayed refunds. It provides that if any tax ordered to be refunded under sub-section (5) of Section 54 is not refunded within 60 days from the date of...
Pick And Choose Method Of Rejecting Certain Entries From Books Of Account Is Arbitrary: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that any pick-and-choose method of rejecting certain entries from the books of account while accepting others without an appropriate justification is arbitrary and may lead to an incomplete, unreasonable, and erroneous computation of the income of an assessee.The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has observed that the ITAT has...
Revisional Jurisdiction Can't Be Invoked For Inadequacy Of Enquiry By AO: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the inadequacy of the inquiry by the AO with respect to certain claims would not in itself be a reason to invoke the powers enshrined in Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has observed that the claims were duly examined during the original assessment proceedings themselves, and...
Accused's Right To Expeditious Conclusion Of Trial Can't Be Defeated When Complainant Appears As Witness On Her Own Terms: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that the right of an accused to the expeditious conclusion of trial cannot be defeated when the complainant chooses to appear as a witness at her own terms. Justice Navin Chawla said that the accused also has a right to the expeditious conclusion of the trial, as mere pendency of a case accusing a person of a criminal offence can attach stigma and...
[Trademarks Act] Individual's Right To Use His Or Her Name For Own Goods Can't Be Compromised: Delhi High Court
Quoting Shakespeare “What's in a name?”, the Delhi High Court has observed that in terms of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the right of a person to use his or her name on one's own goods cannot be compromised, else it would compromise the right to use one's name as an identity marker, which would ex facie be unconstitutional.“In the absence of any such caveat to be found in Section 35 (of...
Wife's Request For Financial Support From Husband Not Cruelty: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that a wife's request for financial support from her husband cannot be termed as an act of cruelty.A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said that though the aggrieved person is entitled to avail the remedy under laws, but crossing the point of “no return” becomes inevitable once the spouses get engulfed in...