Supreme Court Weekly Roundup: March 30 To April 05, 2026

JudgmentsGovt Can Withdraw Tax Concession Given To Industry In Public Interest : Supreme CourtCase Details: State of Maharashtra & Others v. Reliance Industries Ltd. & OthersCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 304The Supreme Court has observed that tax concessions granted by the government create no indefeasible right on the recipient to claim it indefinitely, and the government can withdraw such concessions in the public interest.“The recipient of a concession has no legally enforceable right against the Government to grant of a concession except to enjoy the benefits of the concession during the period of its grant. This right to enjoy is a defeasible one, in the sense, that it may be taken away in exercise of the very power under which the exemption was granted”, observed a bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe, while allowing the Maharashtra Government's appeal against the captive power generators, upholding the government's decision to withdraw the tax benefits received by them for generating captive power (power that is generated by the industry for their own purpose, without relying on grid supply).The dispute arose from electricity duty exemptions granted by the State of Maharashtra since 1994 under Section 5A of the Bombay Electricity Duty Act, 1958 to encourage captive power generation by industries.Can Foreign Arbitral Award Be Challenged In India On Grounds Rejected By Seat Court? Supreme Court Explains 'Transnational Issue Estoppel'Case Details: Nagaraj v. Mylandla v. Pi Opportunities Fund-I and Others Etc.Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 305The Supreme Court has held that enforcement of a foreign arbitral award cannot be blocked on “public policy” grounds under Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when the issue has already been finally decided by the seat court, and Indian courts cannot re-examine the merits under the guise of enforcement, due to the applicability of the doctrine of 'transnational issue estoppel'.“we must necessarily bear in mind that though the grounds under Section 48 of the Arbitration Act would have to be applied independently, in the course of such an exercise by the enforcement court in India, a party which has failed in its challenge to the arbitral award before the seat court cannot seek to reopen factual issues that were argued on merits and settled by such court once again before the enforcement court. One must remember that it is the sovereign commitment of India to honour foreign awards, except on the exhaustive grounds provided under Article V of the New York Convention.”, observed a bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran.In essence, the Court said that “a merits-based evaluation cannot be resorted to by the enforcement court and it cannot reopen factual issues which were conclusively settled on merits by the decision of the seat court.”Delay In Filing Complaint Can Be Fatal In Matrimonial Disputes: Supreme Court Quashes 498A, Dowry Harassment Case Against In-LawsCase Details: Charul Shukla v. State of U.P. & OthersCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 307Emphasising that unexplained delay in initiating criminal proceedings can be fatal in matrimonial disputes, the Supreme Court quashed a dowry harassment case against a woman's parents-in-law and sister-in-law, holding that a delay of nearly seven years without sufficient explanation cast serious doubt on the prosecution's case.The Court set aside the Allahabad High Court's order which had refused to quash the FIR, observing that vague and omnibus allegations without corroborative material cannot justify continuation of criminal prosecution against relatives of the husband.A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed that in matrimonial and family disputes, where evidence is often limited and relationships are deeply personal, timely reporting of alleged offences assumes critical importance to ensure fairness in criminal proceedings. The Court noted that citizens who allege commission of an offence should pursue their remedies in real time, as the law assists those who are vigilant about their rights.'Trust Property Matter Of Public Concern': Supreme Court Restores Criminal Case Over Sale of CSI Church Land In AndhraCase Details: State of Andhra Pradesh v. B Reddeppa Reddy & OrsCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 308The Supreme Court has restored criminal proceedings in a case concerning the alleged fraudulent sale of land belonging to the Church of South India Trust Association (CSITA), holding that property held in trust for the community cannot be treated as a purely private matter and that any irregularity in its alienation is a matter of legitimate public concern.A Bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice R. Mahadevan set aside the Andhra Pradesh High Court's order quashing criminal proceedings against several accused persons in connection with the transfer of 7.75 acres of church trust land at Ananthapuramu.The Court underscored the public character of...

Supreme Court Weekly Roundup: March 30 To April 05, 2026

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags