Bombay High Court Monthly Digest: November 2023 [Citations 519 - 552]

Nominal Index [Citation 519 - 552]Matrix Publicities and Media India Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle- 16(1), Mumbai & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 509Bapu Bajarang Patil v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 510Chandralok People Welfare Association v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 511Kiran P. Pawar v. Bata India Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 512ABC v. XYZ 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 513Abhishek Pictures v. Abhishek Agarwal Arts LLP 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 514Amar S. Mulchandani vs State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 515Municipal Commissioner Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Ashish Laxman Chavan 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 516Meerabai W/o Dnyaneshwar Chatare v. Returning Officer to the Election 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 517Azizur Rehman Gulam v. Radio Restaurant 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 518Swashray Co-op. Housing Society Ltd v. Shanti Enterprises 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 519Dnyaneshwar Eknath Gulhane v. Vinod Ramchandra Lokhande 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 520National Lawyers Campaign for Judicial Transparency and Reforms & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 521Naresh Goyal v. Directorate of Enforcement 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 522Vodafone Idea Limited v. CPC 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 523Mangal Ramsurat Singh v. State Of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 524ABC v. XYZ 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 525Hasmukh Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 526Swararaj @ Raj Shrikant Thackeray v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 527High Court of Judicature at Bombay on its own Motion v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 528Sheezan Mohd. Khan v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 529Ramona Pinto v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 530Diversey India Hygiene Private Limited v. ACIT 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 531Dr. Vijay Uma Shankar Mishra v. Commissioner, MCGM and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 532Danish Ali Jamaluddin Ahmed v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 533Chandar Mahadev Naik v. Income Tax Officer 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 534V Sridharan v. Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 535Ganesh Ramesh Chavan v. Income Tax Officer 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 536Ramona Pinto v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 537Ramona Pinto v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 538Prestige Estate Projects Ltd v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 539Satya Prakash Choudhry v. Yash Raj Films Pvt Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 540M/s Singh Automobiles v. Principal Secretary, Ministry of Energy & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 541Anil Goel v. Union of India & Anr. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 542ABC v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 543Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply and Transport v. BEST Jagrut Kamgar Sanghatana and Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 544Sameer Lawate v. State of Maharashtra and Anr 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 545DCW Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 546Savita Shrimant Ghule v. Sangita Bibhishan Sanap & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 547AjitSingh Ghorpade v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 548Rohit s/o Chandrakant Bhagat v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 549L&T Finance Limited v. Diamond Projects Limited 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 550Anandrao G Pawar v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 551Vishwas S/o Pitambar Patil v. State of Maharashtra 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 552Reports/JudgmentsSystem Default Is The Standard Excuse Of Department When It Comes To Giving Refunds: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Matrix Publicities and Media India Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle- 16(1), Mumbai & Ors.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 509The Bombay High Court stated that system default is the standard excuse of the department when it comes to giving refunds.The bench of Justice K. R. Shriram and Justice Neela Gokhale observed that the excuse used is that the system under the control of the Centralized Processing Center (CPC), Bangalore, has some issues and, therefore, amounts are not being released to assessees. Interest is payable by law until the date of refund, and the Department does not realize that it is public money that is used to pay interest. That is a waste and a burden on the exchequer.Trial Judge Went Overboard: Bombay High Court Alters Murder Convict's Sentence From 'Remainder Of Life' To 'Life Imprisonment'Case Title: Bapu Bajarang Patil v. State of MaharashtraCitation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 510The Bombay High Court modified the sentence of a man convicted of murdering his wife from “life imprisonment for the entire remaining of his life” to “imprisonment for life” citing the importance of adhering to the wording adopted in section 302 of the IPC.A division bench of Justice VV Kankanwadi and Justice Abhay S Waghwase sitting at Aurangabad observed that the trial judge went overboard in sentencing the convict to life imprisonment for the entire remaining of his life. “It is rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellant that learned Trial Judge has gone overboard by imposing sentence of...

Bombay High Court Monthly Digest: November 2023 [Citations 519 - 552]

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags