Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 11 To September 17, 2023

Citations 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 813 to 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 840NOMINAL INDEX Aphv India Investco. Private Limited Versus ACIT 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 813 M/s BCC-MONALISHA (JV) v. Container Corporation of India, ARB.P. 933/2022 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 814 DR. REDDY’S LABORATORIES LIMITED vs FAST CURE PHARMA AND ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 815 M/s BCC-MONALISHA (JV) v. Container Corporation of India, ARB.P. 933/2022 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 816 SANGHI BROS (INDORE) PVT. LTD. vs KAMLENDRA SINGH 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 817 TEK CHAND v. STATE OF U P & ORS. and other connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 818 Amazon Web Services India Pvt Ltd & Anr. Versus ITO 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 819 X v. Y 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 820 FIROZ AND ANR. v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 821 Himanshu Kumar v. UPSC & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 822 ANITA SANTIAGO v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 823 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -1, Chandigarh Versus M/S Kuantum Papers Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 824 PALLAVIMOHANALIASPALLAVIMENON v. RAGHU MENON 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 825 SILICA UDYOG INDIA PVT LTD v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. and other connected matters 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 826 MALINI CHAUDHRI v. RANJIT CHAUDHRI & ANR. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 827 Rajat Kapoor v. Union of India & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 828 BHAVREEN KANDHARI v. SHRI C. D. SINGH AND ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 829 LIVING MEDIA INDIA LIMITED & ANR. v. AABTAK CHANNEL.COM (JOHN DOES) & ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 830 X v. Y 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 831 SANTOSH BHUTANI & ANR v. SAVITRI DEVI THROUGH LRs 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 832 Sarika Patel v. State 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 833 GOPAL RAI v. UNION OF INDIA 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 834 SIDHARTHA EXTENSION POCKET C RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 835 Ashok Kumar Rajdev & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi Through Directorate of Vigilance & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 836 MAJOR GENERAL M.S. AHLUWALIA v. M/S TEHELKA.COM & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 837 Sanjay Kumar Pundeer v. State 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 838 Sandhya Gupta & Anr v. State 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 839 RAJASTHAN EQUESTRIAN ASSOCIATION v. EQUESTRIAN FEDERATION OF INDIA AND ORS. 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 840Overlooking Assesssee’s Reply Demonstrates Non-Application Of Mind By The AO: Delhi High CourtCase Title: Aphv India Investco. Private Limited Versus ACITCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 813The Delhi High Court has quashed the draft assessment orders, final assessment orders, and consequential demand on the grounds that the assessing officer inadvertently overlooked the email reply of the assessee, in which the assessee disclosed vital facts pertaining to its case.The bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Girish Kathpalia has observed that the denial of sufficient time to respond was not just an abrogation of jus naturale but also infringed clause B(1) of the Standard Operating Procedure dated November 19, 2020, of the CBDT, according to which normally a response time of 15 days has to be given to the assessee in order to respond to the notice under Section 142 of the Income Tax Act.Claims Cannot Be Referred To Arbitration When The Requirement To Mandatorily Notify Such Claims Was Not Followed: Delhi High CourtCase Title: M/s BCC-MONALISHA (JV) v. Container Corporation of India, ARB.P. 933/2022Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 814The Delhi High Court has held that claims of a party cannot be referred to arbitration when the requirement to mandatorily notify such claims with the General Manger (GM) was not followed.Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri held that the Court can conduct a preliminary enquiry to find out if the dispute is arbitrable in terms of the agreement and refuse arbitration when the claims are ex facie non-arbitrable.Rectification Petition Maintainable Before High Court If ‘Dynamic Effect’ Of Trademark Registration Felt Within Its Jurisdiction: Delhi High CourtCase Title: DR. REDDY’S LABORATORIES LIMITED vs FAST CURE PHARMA AND ANR.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 815The Delhi High Court has ruled that High Courts have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the rectification petition seeking removal of trademark from the Register of Trademarks under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, if the ‘dynamic effect’ of the impugned registration is felt within the High Court’s jurisdiction by the person who has challenged the validity of the trade mark registration or has sought its removal.Accordingly, the court said, the High Court dealing with a suit for infringement of Trademark would have the jurisdiction to entertain the rectification petition after the court comes to the conclusion that the plea of invalidity raised by the party under Section 124(1)(ii) of the Act, is tenable.If Contract Mandates Arbitration Only When Claims Collectively Are 20% Or Less Of Contract Value, Court Won’t Compel Arbitration If Exceeds : Delhi High CourtCase Title: M/s BCC-MONALISHA (JV) v. Container Corporation of India, ARB.P. 933/2022Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 816The Delhi High Court...

Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 11 To September 17, 2023

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags