Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property/ Transactions Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Indian Laws - Tribunal - Case Laws

Showing 1 to 20 of 87 Records

More information of case laws are visible to the Subscriber of a package i.e:-
Party Name, Court Name, Date of Decision, Full Text of Headnote & Decision etc.

• 2019 (4) TMI 1161 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY NEW DELHI
  
  Benami transactions - offence under Benami Act - onus of proving a benami transaction - whether R-2 is the beneficial owner ? - whether transaction was bona fide for beyond reasonable doubt? - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the beneficial interest in the property is with R- 1. The Adjudicating Authority has correctly observed that there is nothing to show that the property in question is held by R-1 for the benefit of R-2. The sale deeds for all the 10 flats has not been challenged by the IO. The erstwhile sellers had entered/executed the sale deed with R-1, representing themselves to be the true owners. As per the mandate of Section 91 and Section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, If a transfer has been done of an immovable property vide a written documentary evidences in the form of a registered sale deed. The contradictory stand b....... + More

---

• 2018 (11) TMI 94 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
  
  Rectification/modification of the interest amount on penalty imposed - Section 43A of the Competition Act, 2002 - case of appellant is that there being partial order of stay and part of the amount having been deposited with the COMPAT and later on total amount of ₹ 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores) having been deposited with the COMPAT, the Appellants are not liable to pay any interest. Held that:- Similar issue fell for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan and Anr. Vs. J.K. Synthetics Limited and Anr. [2011 (7) TMI 1300 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], where it was held that whenever there is an interim order of stay in regard to any revision in rate or tariff, unless the order granting interim stay or the final order dismissing the writ petition specifies otherwise, on the dismissal of the writ petition o....... + More

---

• 2018 (8) TMI 180 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
  
  Contravention of Competition Act - direction to Opposite Parties to cease and desist from indulging in such activity - contravention of Section 3(3)(a) & (b) of the Competition Act, 2002 - alleged price increase - Held that:- The Commission not only looked into ‘Sate-wise Market’ but also ‘Region-wise Market’ and range of percentage change in prices between 2007-2011. The Commission has noticed the Range of Percentage change of different years for the months of October over September (2007-2011) for ‘Central, Northern and Eastern States’. The Commission also highlighting the unprecedented trend for the percentage increase in the prices in all the five regions namely- Central Region, Northern Region, Eastern Region, Western Region and Southern Region - It is clear that the Commission while dealing with the market dealt with the ‘relevant m....... + More

---

• 2017 (9) TMI 1698 - CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
  
  Representation of the applicant made in reply to the Charge Memorandum - Commencement of inquiry proceedings - Held that:- The main ground raised by the applicant in view of the contention of the respondents and the other grounds of the applicant, are required to be examined in detail - Further, as submitted by the respondents’ counsel that the inquiry has not yet been commenced, the prayer for interim relief shall be considered after filing of counter by the respondents or at an appropriate time, if the applicant shows any urgency. Issue notice.

---

• 2017 (2) TMI 1228 - CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD
  
  Legality of promotion to the cadre of ACIT on the basis of All India level seniority list pertaining to the cadre of Income Tax Officers (ITO) - Held that:- There exists no All India seniority list pertaining to the cadre of ITOs based on the principles/ directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in N.R.Parmar (2012 (12) TMI 872 - SUPREME COURT ). The fact that the cadre of ITO is a feeder cadre for promotion to the cadre of ACIT cannot be disputed. We find some considerable force in the argument of Shri M.S.Trivedi that if the respondents were to effect promotion to the cadre of ACIT on the basis of the existing All India level seniority list of ITOs as on 01.01.2012 (pre-Parmar) circulated through the letter dated 01.09.2015 vide Annexure A/1, there is likelihood of some of the ITOs who were given deemed date of eligibility based on the de....... + More

---

• 2017 (1) TMI 1600 - CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
  
  Promotion to the post of Commissioner of Income Tax - the promotion of applicant was not put in sealed cover as it was not approved - no criminal or disciplinary proceedings were pending against the applicant - Held that:- On the date of consideration for promotion to the post of Commissioner of Income Tax by the DPC, i.e. 05.06.2015, no criminal or disciplinary proceedings were pending against the applicant. He was found fit by the DPC and recommended for promotion. ACC, however, did not approve his promotion and desired that all complaints be decided. As a matter of fact, no complaint was pending against the applicant. The only criminal case registered against him had been closed by the investigating agency (CBI) itself and the closure report filed u/s 173 CrPC was accepted by the Special Judge, CBI. The case of the applicant is squarel....... + More

---

• 2017 (1) TMI 1218 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI
  
  Company Petition under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for realization of this money - Default by Corporate Debtor - Objective under MRU Act - Whether an order could be passed u/s.7 of the Code or not? - Held that:- This Bench, on perusal of this documents filed by the Creditor, it is evident that the Corporate Debtor defaulted in making payments as mentioned above, and he has placed the record of the default with Information Utility and he also placed the name of the Insolvency Resolution Professional to act as interim resolution Professional, having this Bench noticed that default has occurred and there is no disciplinary proceedings pending against the proposed resolution professional, therefore the Application under sub-section (2) of section 7 is taken as complete, accordingly this Bench hereby admits this Application declaring ....... + More

---

• 2016 (12) TMI 1734 - COMPETITION APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI
  
  Anti-Competitive act - Quantum of penalty - The Commission has calculated the penalty at the rate of 2% against the maximum of 10% on the average turnover of the Appellants for the years 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 - Held that:- The term 'turnover' is interpreted for the purposes of Section 27(b) of the Act to mean value of goods and services which are made subject matter of investigation under Section 26 of the Act and hence liable for punishment under Section 27 of the Act - Penalty has to be calculated with reference to the gross premium received by UIICL as insurance provider under RSBY/CHIS scheme and penalty for each of the Appellants will be a proportion of their share in such premium. In determining the rate of penalty at 2%, the Commission has considered the peculiarities of the insurance sector and the importance of insur....... + More

---

• 2016 (7) TMI 1347 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI
  
  Violation of section 11C(3) and section 11C(5) of the SEBI Act - disclosure requirement - guilty of violating the 1997 Regulations and PIT Regulations - Held that:- Failure to make disclosure during the period from February 20, 2010 till May 2010 cannot be attributed to the appellant and, therefore, the appellant cannot be held guilty of violating the 1997 Regulations and PIT Regulations. Consequently, penalty imposed under section 15A(b) of SEBI Act on ground that the appellant has violated the 1997 Regulations and PIT Regulations cannot be sustained. As regards the penalty of ₹ 2,00,000 imposed for violating section 11C(3) and ₹ 2,00,000 for violating section 11C(5) of the SEBI Act it is not in dispute that the appellant had failed to furnish all particulars sought in the summons issued against the appellant and that the app....... + More

---

• 2016 (6) TMI 1230 - CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD
  
  Holding DPC for the purpose of promotion from the cadre of Income Tax Officer (ITO) to the cadre of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT) for the vacancy year 2014-15 - Held that:- No material whatsoever has been placed by the respondents before the Tribunal to show that even if the DPC were to consider the officers in the cadre of ITOs as per the All India Seniority List to be published in terms of N.R.Parmar (2012 (12) TMI 872 - SUPREME COURT), the applicant is not entitled to be considered for promotion. They should have pointed out the total available vacancies for the vacancy year 2015-16 and the approximate position of the applicant in the proposed seniority list. No such exercise was undertaken. It is not the case of the respondents that there are several other officials, who are senior to him in the cadre of ITOs before the ....... + More

---

• 2016 (4) TMI 1329 - COMPETITION APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI
  
  Anti-competitive Activities - Whether the appellants could be accused of bid-rigging/collusive bidding and held guilty of acting in contravention of Section 3(1) read with Sections 3(3)(a) and 3(3)(d) of the Competition Act, 2002 merely because they quoted substantially similar price for the product, namely, Polyester Blended Duck Ankle Boot Rubber Sole (hereinafter described as 'the Jungle Boots'),which is required to be manufactured as per the specifications prescribed by the Director General (Supply and Demand) (DGS&D) and is mostly purchased by the Government Agencies like Paramilitary Forces, State Police, Railways etc. on the basis of the Rate Contracts executed on annual basis? - Held that:- Unfortunately, neither the DG nor the Commission gave due weightage to the aforesaid factors and heavily banked on the factors like identical ....... + More

---

• 2016 (3) TMI 1327 - COMPETITION APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
  
  Anti-Competitive Activities - interpretation of statute - meaning of 'Turnover' appearing in Section 27(b) of the Competition Act, 2002 - imposition of penalty under Section 27(b) or its proviso. Whether the term 'turnover' appearing in Section 27(b) of the Competition Act, 2002 and its proviso means the total turnover of any enterprise or association of enterprises or person or association of persons, who may have entered into any agreement in respect of production, supply, distribution, storage, acquisition or control of goods or provision of services in violation of Section 3 of the Act or of an enterprise or a group which may be found guilty of abuse of dominant position within the meaning of Section 4? - Held that:- One of the well-recognized rules of interpretation of statutes is the rule of contextual interpretation. This rule requ....... + More

---

• 2016 (3) TMI 1326 - COMPETITION APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI
  
  Anti-Competitive Activities - closure of proceedings of the case under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002 - discrimination followed by DGHS and ECHS between hospitals on the basis of their accreditation to the National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and healthcare providers (NABH) - appellant - informant has alleged that there is no scientific basis to this discrimination. Whether DGHS and ECHS can be termed as 'enterprise' under Section 2(h) to make them liable under Sections 3 or 4 as the case may be? Whether there has been any discrimination introduced by the fact of accreditation of hospitals to NABH by fixing higher rates for the accredited hospitals and thereby creating a discriminatory environment not based on sound reasons leading to abuse of dominance by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2? Held that:- It can be clearly seen that ....... + More

---

• 2015 (12) TMI 1776 - COMPETITION APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI
  
  Anti-Competitive Activity - cord blood banking - umbilical cord stem cell banking services - It is the case of the appellant that Cryo-Save based in Bangalore and Babycell based in Lonavala were prepared to pay higher amount per case, it chose Cryobanks because of better technology - Smt. Manju Jain entered into an agreement with LifeCell to obtain its umbilical cord stem cell banking services - appellant having an arrangement with Cryobanks and LifeCell cannot be permitted to provide its services to the hospital whee Smt. Manju Jain visited - alleged abuse of dominant position - contravention of Section 3(1) of Competition Act, 2002. Whether the finding recorded by the majority of the Commission that the appellant is guilty of acting in violation of Section 3(1) of the Act is legally sustainable? Whether the penalty of ₹ 3,81,58,30....... + More

---

• 2015 (12) TMI 1773 - COMPETITION APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI
  
  Anti-competitive Activities - bid rigging - Cartel - contract for supply of feed valves by Respondent No. 2 - suppression of material facts - it was alleged that the appellants have indulged in bid- rigging/collusive bidding and thereby contravened the provisions of Section 3(1) read Section 3(3)(a) and 3(3)(d) of the Act - penalty imposed on average turnover - case of appellant is that findings recorded by the DG and the Commission on the issues of formation of cartel and bid rigging/ collusive bidding is perverse. Held that:- The cartel is an association of producers who by agreement among themselves attempt to control production, sale and prices of the product to obtain a monopoly in any particular industry or commodity. Analysing the object of formation of a cartel in other words, it amounts to an unfair trade practice which is not in....... + More

---

• 2015 (11) TMI 1818 - COMPETITION APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
  
  Refusal of order of investigation - Whether the Competition Commission of India (for short, the Commission) is legally correct and justified in refusing to order an investigation into the alleged abuse of dominant position by Respondent Nos.3 to7? HELD THAT:- While examining information received under Section 19, the Commission has only to satisfy itself whether or not there exists a prima facie case requiring an investigation. If the Commission finds that the averments contained in the information do not disclose any prima facie case, then only it can order closure of the matter. However, for that purpose the Commission cannot delve deep into the merits of the allegations, rely upon undisclosed material and record a finding on the tenability or otherwise of the allegations.What we wish to emphasise is that while scrutinising the allegati....... + More

---

• 2015 (9) TMI 1691 - COMPETITION APPELLANT TRIBUNAL
  
  Refusal to direct an investigation - Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 - closure of case under Section 26(2) of the Act - whether the appellant should be non-suited on the ground that he had not approached the Commission with clean hands and that he has been representing and espousing the cause of M/s. B.S.N. Joshi & Sons Ltd.? HELD THAT:- A reading of the plain language of Section 18 shows that the Commission is under an obligation to ensure that practices having adverse effect on competition are eliminated. The Commission is also duty bound to promote and sustain competition, protect the interest of consumers, and ensure freedom of trade carried on by other participants in markets in India. Of course, the exercise of power under Section 18 is subject to other provisions of the Act. Section 19(1) empowers the Commission t....... + More

---

• 2015 (4) TMI 1067 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
  
  RTI application - Held that:- Point A(v) is about the address of the house stated to have been taken on rent of ₹ 10,000/- by Shri S.K. Verma at Bangalore. Point A(vi) is about providing the address of all the Government quarters/residential accommodation allotted to Shri S.K. Verma during his tenure at Bangalore. Point B is regarding providing of details of information whether the matter regarding fraudulent claim of income tax deduction by Shri Verma by showing Government quarter as private property and claiming income tax deduction for the monthly rent of ₹ 10,000/- has been brought to the notice of the Registrar and Hon’ble President.In my view the information/factual position in respect of point A(v), A(vi) and B can be provided. Accordingly the same may be provided forthwith. As regards the points A(iii) and A(iv), the s....... + More

---

• 2015 (4) TMI 482 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI
  
  Violation of Regulation 3(a), 4(1) and 4(2)(a),(b),(e) and (g) of SEBI PFUTP (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 - Violation of Regulation 7 read with Clause A(1), A(3), A(4) and A(5) of Code of Conduct for Stock Brokers under SEBI (Stock-Brokers and Sub-Brokers) Regulations, 1992 - Self trading - Shares purchased at higher price and sold at lower price. Held that:- Regarding submissions of Appellant that price of scrip of SGWL was increasing since start of IP with increase in volume, and hence volatility in scirp, enticed its dealers towards arbitrage opportunity and therefore dealers of AIPL were followers and not creators of the volumes. Ld. AO has rightly held that volumes, increase or decrease, are not concern of regulators, but artificial creation of volumes, through....... + More

---

• 2015 (2) TMI 549 - CESTAT NEW DELHI
  
  Denial of information sought under RTI Act - Exemption from disclosure of Rule 8(1)(d) of RTI Rules - Held that:- Rule 8(1)(d), which exempts certain information from disclosure. The same relates to information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information. - The information sought in the present appeal does not fall under the category information against the said Section Rule 8(1)(d) (sic). As the Tribunal order has been published, the providing of order-in-original and the Show Cause Notice involved in the said appeal will not cause any prejudice to any person. As such, I am of the view the same should be provided. - Decided in favour of appellant.

---