AI-curated court updates, legal developments, and practice-area insights for Indian legal professionals.
The Delhi High Court's pro-tem order in Malikie v. Xiaomi raises concerns about jurisprudential clarity in Standard Essential Patent (SEP) cases, emphasizing essentiality assessment and rate calculation complexities.
The Indian government has increased the concessional import duty on gold, silver, and platinum from 4.35% to 10%. This change is effective from May 13, 2026, under Notification 57/2000-Customs.
The Bombay High Court has mandated the establishment of a special NCLT Bench after an insolvency petition was left pending without orders. The court emphasized that such delays undermine the intent of IBC proceedings.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that insurers cannot evade liability without evidence proving a lack of a valid driving license. The court also upheld compensation based on gross salary.
NCLT Mumbai ruled that an arbitration clause does not prevent the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) once a financial default has been established under Section 7 of the IBC.
The Delhi High Court ruled that GST was applicable to frozen chicken supplied to the Indian Army, directing reimbursement of GST along with interest due to delayed payment.
The Karnataka High Court upheld the legality of consolidated GST show cause notices covering multiple financial years, clarifying that the law does not restrict notices to a single fiscal period.
The GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) upheld findings against a developer for failing to transfer the full benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) to homebuyers, confirming that excess benefits provided to some cannot offset losses to others.
The Bombay High Court ruled that GST registration cannot be cancelled without proper hearing and a reasoned order, quashing existing cancellation orders that violated the principles of natural justice.
The Gauhati High Court has ruled that litigants who seek multiple adjournments cannot later blame their lawyers for delays in proceedings. This ruling reiterates the accountability of litigants in legal processes.
The Tripura High Court acquitted the accused in a cheque dishonour case, ruling that the notice served on a family member did not comply with statutory requirements under Section 138 of the NI Act.
The Tripura High Court acquitted an accused in a cheque dishonour case, ruling that a notice served on a family member was not valid compliance with statutory requirements under section 138 of the NI Act.
The Karnataka High Court dismissed an excise demand citing lack of scientific basis, confirming that clandestine removal of goods cannot be established by mere power consumption analysis.