FININ2MIN · JUDGMENT INTELLIGENCE

HC/SC Judgments · Batch 31

By topic: Income Tax (6) · Customs, Excise & Service Tax (6) · GST (5) · State VAT & Excise (8) · Banking, SARFAESI & Debt Recovery (11) · Insolvency & IBC (6) · Arbitration & Commercial Disputes (7) · Stamp Duty, Property & RERA (1) · Judgment hub · Search judgments

50 court rulings, each linked to its complete public judgment copy. Decisions dated 2026-07-08 to 2026-10-12. Also see: Batch 28 (43) · Batch 29 (50) · Batch 30 (36).

  1. Breach Candy Hospital Trust v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.
    Bombay High Court · 2026-10-12 · Writ Petition Nos. 2462 of 2010 · Breach Candy Hospital Trust cannot be denied section 10(23C)(via) approval merely for recurring surpluses or small spending on poor patients.
  2. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shantaben K. Patel
    Gujarat High Court · 2026-10-09 · R/Tax Appeal No. 1439 of 2006 and R/Tax Appeal No. 1054 of 2007 · Rs. 50 Crore from selling self-generated Nirma trade-marks was not taxable, as their cost could not be ascertained; penalty fell.
  3. Kahakasha Parvin v. The Commissioner Of Customs And Ors
    Delhi High Court · 2026-10-09 · W.P.(C) 9311/2026 · gold jewellery detained at the airport must be released on compliance with the order-in-original despite a pending revision.
  4. Bhagyoday Agro Industries v. Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & Central Excise & Ors.
    Bombay High Court · 2026-10-12 · Writ Petition No. 9256 of 2026 · a GST appeal rejected for pre-deposit shortfall without notice, though ₹1.5 crore had been deposited, was sent back for fresh hearing.
  5. Bajaj Capital Ltd. v. UoI & Anr.
    Delhi High Court · 2026-10-06 · W.P.(C) 4217/2007 · a Commissioner cannot issue service-tax clarifications outside the advance-ruling scheme; the broker's refund claim returns for decision.
  6. Vasundhara Sales Corporation Through Its Partner Mr. Sidharth Suragarhia v. M/S Sss Designtek Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Director Mr. Sachin Handa & Anr.
    Delhi High Court · 2026-09-30 · RFA(COMM) 49/2022 · whether a C-form extends limitation as an acknowledgment cannot be decided under Order VII Rule 11; the plaint's rejection was set aside.
  7. Gudla Vanaja and others v. Assistant Commissioner (ST)
    Telangana High Court · 2026-09-30 · W.P. No. 20397 of 2025 and batch (including W.P. Nos. 26393, 34129 and 34134 of 2025) · GST notices and orders authenticated and uploaded on the portal are valid without a visible signature, but not without a DIN or RFN.
  8. Amit Kumar Saha & Anr. v. Canara Bank & Ors.
    Calcutta High Court · 2026-10-08 · WPA 22668 of 2026 · flat-buyers disputing a bank's title claim must sue in the civil court; the SARFAESI possession notice was set aside and possession restored.
  9. Bala Sreenivas Rao Somisetty v. The Income Tax Officer
    Andhra Pradesh High Court · 2026-10-12 · WP No. 28520 of 2023 and batch (including WP No. 25803 of 2026) · section 147A of the Income-tax Act, inserted retrospectively by the Finance Act, 2026, was struck down and reassessment notices set aside.
  10. Manoj Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another
    Allahabad High Court · 2026-10-06 · WRIT TAX No. 4061 of 2026 · a GST adjudication order passed after notice only on the portal, years after registration was cancelled, was set aside.
  11. Laxmi Narayan Gupta v. State Of U.P And 3 Others
    Allahabad High Court · 2026-10-08 · WRIT TAX No. - 4103 of 2026 · refusing cross-examination of two officers for a wrong reason does not by itself require it; the taxpayer went to appeal with limitation waived.
  12. Sanjeev Kaushik v. Commissioner, Commercial Tax
    Allahabad High Court · 2026-10-06 · SALES/TRADE TAX REVISION No. - 125 of 2026 · railway container contractors who gave no consignor and consignee records are deemed dealers under the UP VAT Act; appeals failed.
  13. Principal Officer, LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Ashish Agrawal v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida & Anr.
    Supreme Court of India · 2026-10-07 · Civil Appeal Nos. 18067/2017 · a reassessment cannot rest on a ground other than the one on which it was begun; the reassessments of LG Electronics for 2006-09 fell.
  14. Nirupama Nanda v. State of Odisha & Ors.
    Orissa High Court · 2026-10-07 · W.P.(C) No. 12607 of 2026 · a lecturer whose employer deducted tax but did not report it in Form 26AS cannot be pursued for the demand; the officer must verify and rectify.
  15. Modern Asset v. KNK Construction Private Limited.
    Supreme Court of India · 2026-10-08 · Special Leave Petition (C) No.25068 of 2026 · an operational creditor whose claim was cut to 0.72% in CIRP may raise the balance only as a set-off in the resolution applicant's arbitration.
  16. Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation-1, New Delhi v. Marguerite Lasusa Chawla
    Delhi High Court · 2026-10-06 · ITA 521/2025 · the Revenue was given a last chance, until 31 October, to credit a 92-year-old assessee's refund or face interest.
  17. The Commissioner of Central Tax v. M/s Jeans Knit Private Limited
    Karnataka High Court · 2026-09-16 · WRIT APPEAL NO. 966 OF 2026 (T-RES) · the Revenue's appeals against GST refund orders were time-barred, as limitation ran from issue and delay beyond one month cannot be condoned.
  18. M/s Sree Matha Cosmetic Industries v. The Board of Directors of the UCO Bank and Ors
    Kerala High Court · 2026-08-10 · WA No. 649 of 2026 · an MSME that never applied under the 2015 revival framework cannot stop SARFAESI steps by writ; its challenges lie before the DRT.
  19. M/s Mahakali Foods Pvt. Ltd. (Unit-2) v. Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. & Ors.
    Gujarat High Court · 2026-08-06 · R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 427 of 2026 in R/Special Civil · an MSME Facilitation Council is functus officio after its award and cannot decide post-award interest; interest stops at the 75% deposit.
  20. M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner (CT)
    Telangana High Court · 2026-08-05 · WRIT PETITION Nos.3704 and 7449 of 2009 · Mahindra & Mahindra's vehicle transfers to regional offices were inter-state sales under section 3(a) of the CST Act, as orders drove despatch.
  21. A V International & Anr. v. Additional Director General, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence & Ors.
    Delhi High Court · 2026-08-07 · W.P.(C) 16149/2023 and W.P.(C) 5024/2024 · two customs show-cause notices from one DRI investigation are separate proceedings; the first order goes to the CESTAT.
  22. Veena Solanki and Ors v. Karuna Singh and Ors
    Delhi High Court · 2026-08-03 · FAO 28/2019 · allotting 964 new shares during a court restraint on third-party interests was disobedience, and the earlier shareholding was rightly restored.
  23. Axis Bank Limited v. Tarun Kanti Ghosh
    Calcutta High Court · 2026-08-07 · FMAT No. 145 of 2026 · a civil court cannot injunct SARFAESI measures, including action yet to be taken, once the bank has begun action under section 13.
  24. South Indian Bank Limited v. Propello Innovations Private Limited & Ors.
    Calcutta High Court · 2026-08-07 · WPA 25431 of 2024 With COT 56 of 2026 · a Single Judge should not hear a borrower's writ against SARFAESI recovery on RBI penal-charge guidelines when the DRT remedy exists.
  25. REFULGENT BUILDCON LLP -Versus- K.N. Wire Private Limited and Others
    Calcutta High Court · 2026-07-28 · F.M.A.T. No.488 of 2025 + CAN 1 of 2025 · an auction purchaser with a sale certificate and possession was entitled to an injunction against the borrower and lessee, not just status quo.
  26. Anil Khemani and Another v. Axis Bank Ltd. and Another
    Bombay High Court · 2026-08-06 · WRIT PETITION NO. 886 OF 2026 · Axis Bank's reasoned order classifying a former distributor company as fraud over an undisclosed account was upheld.
  27. ICICI Bank Ltd v. District Police Chief and Ors
    Kerala High Court · 2026-07-27 · WP(C) No. 23371 of 2026 · a secured creditor who is dispossessed after taking possession under SARFAESI can again seek the Magistrate's help under section 14.
  28. Oguljeren Derchiyeva v. Union of India
    Delhi High Court · 2026-08-05 · W.P.(C) 6948/2023 · a passenger who crossed the green channel with 2.4 kg of undeclared gold cannot get re-export under section 125 of the Customs Act.
  29. Premium Sugars v. Union of India
    Bombay High Court · 2026-08-03 · WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 18701 OF 2026 · sugar exporters with advance payments could not claim exemption from the 13 May 2026 export ban, as quota allocation gave no vested right.
  30. Sandeep Singh and Another v. State of Punjab and Others
    Punjab and Haryana High Court · 2026-07-15 · CWP-16774-2024 · a Rs.59.77 lakh deficiency demand on a 2018 sale deed was quashed, as section 47-A proceedings began after three years on a later inspection.
  31. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad v. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
    Gujarat High Court · 2026-07-31 · First Appeal Nos. 752, 753, 754, 755, 756, 757, 758, 759 and 761 of 2026 · Ahmedabad's civic body could not raise property-tax demands in 2016 for 2007-08 to 2015-16, as the Rules need assessment within the year.
  32. The State of Tamil Nadu v. I.Vetrivel
    Madras High Court · 2026-07-09 · TCR(MD).Nos.23 of 2024 · works contractors buying sand, bricks and blue metal from unregistered dealers owe purchase tax and penalty under the TNGST and TNVAT Acts.
  33. The Karur Vysya Bank Limited v. State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited and Ors
    Madras High Court · 2026-07-29 · WP No. 28170 of 2024 · SARFAESI powers over a mortgaged leasehold do not override the lessor's right of re-entry for breach; the bank's writ failed.
  34. Chandan Bhowal v. Authorized Officer, TATA Capital Housing Finance Limited & Ors
    Calcutta High Court · 2026-07-30 · CO/100/2026 · SARFAESI action by Tata Capital Housing Finance on a loan below Rs.20 lakh was without jurisdiction; the DRT's dismissal was set aside.
  35. RELIANCE ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD. v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
    Madhya Pradesh High Court · 2026-07-08 · WRIT PETITION No. 12775 of 2016 · stamp duty on assigning a bank loan to an asset reconstruction company is limited to the notified 0.1%; no fresh duty on the mortgaged property.
  36. THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY-CUM-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR M.P. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD v. SHRI RAMRAJA INDUSTRIES PLTO THR. AND OTHERS
    Madhya Pradesh High Court · 2026-07-28 · WRIT PETITION No. 1771 of 2021 · the buyer of a defaulting lessee's assets at a SARFAESI auction is not an 'unauthorised occupant' liable to summary eviction by the MPIDC.
  37. Superintending Engineer (MM), Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited v. Anamika Conductors Pvt. Ltd.,
    Rajasthan High Court · 2026-07-24 · D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5190/2024 · the 75% MSME pre-deposit is mandatory but need not accompany the section 34 petition, so a utility seeking time to deposit was wrongly ousted.
  38. Jasraj Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. and others v. State of Maharashtra and others
    Bombay High Court · 2026-07-28 · WRIT PETITION NO. 8601 OF 2026 · an auction purchaser under SARFAESI can seek a writ to compel the Tahsildar and police to deliver possession under a Magistrate's order.
  39. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION v. RACHNA JHUNJHUNWALA & ANR.
    Supreme Court of India · 2026-07-28 · Civil Appeal No(s). 9768/2026 · EPFO's uncrystallised interest and damages are contingent liabilities, and a resolution plan that leaves them out is not a violation of the IBC.
  40. M/s BSR Infratech India Ltd. v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
    Karnataka High Court · 2026-07-28 · COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO.182 OF 2025 · Indian Oil could not keep Rs. 36,64,474 of a contractor's deposit for lost input tax credit, having shown no default, loss or contractual right.
  41. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner (ST)
    Madras High Court · 2026-07-27 · Tax Case No. 19 of 2026 · omission of the words wilful suppression in the order does not defeat a TNVAT penalty where the record shows suppression of turnover.
  42. M.K Ananthanarayanan v. Union of India
    Madras High Court · 2026-07-29 · Crl OP No. 15633 of 2023 · a statutory auditor could not be prosecuted by the SFIO under the Companies Act, 1956 for failing to verify records; no offence or wilfulness.
  43. PRAKASH SHARMA -VS- M/S. VISION CELL (PVT.) LTD.
    Calcutta High Court · 2026-07-29 · CRR 3433 OF 2022 · a sole proprietor's family member, neither drawer nor partner, cannot be prosecuted under section 141 of the NI Act for the firm's cheques.
  44. Prameela Varghese v. Abraham Samuel
    Kerala High Court · 2026-07-29 · RFA No. 173 of 2006 · an acquittal in a cheque-bounce case does not bar a civil suit on the same cheque, but the suit failed as voluntary execution was not proved.
  45. The Commissioner Of Central Tax, Cgst Delhi East v. Samiah International Builder Pvt. Ltd
    Delhi High Court · 2026-07-28 · CEAC 5/2024 · the Revenue's appeal on the taxability of a service lies before the Supreme Court, not the High Court, under section 35L.
  46. M/s. P.I. Polymers v. The Commerical Tax Officer
    Madras High Court · 2026-07-24 · W.A.Nos.384 & 387 of 2020 · tax paid on buying DEPB licences gets no input tax credit under section 19 of the TNVAT Act, as DEPB licences are not in the First Schedule.
  47. Mary Peter v. Senior Manager and Ors
    Kerala High Court · 2026-07-22 · WP(C) No. 40822 of 2025 · the Banking Ombudsman cannot review or recall a disposed complaint, and a rejection letter without reasons fails; fresh order in two months.
  48. M/s Intex Technologies (India) Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
    Punjab and Haryana High Court · 2026-07-20 · VATAP-29-2016 (O&M) · a Rs.94,500 check-post penalty on mobile phones sent with accessories was set aside, as a bona fide classification dispute shows no evasion.
  49. Reserve Bank of India v. Paytm Payments Bank Ltd.
    Delhi High Court · 2026-07-08 · CO.PET. 3/2026 · on the RBI's petition the court ordered the winding up of a payments bank under the Banking Regulation Act and appointed an Official Liquidator.
  50. G. Nagendran v. Kerala State Electricity Board and Anr
    Kerala High Court · 2026-07-28 · WA No. 1718 of 2022 · KSEB could not make a court-auction buyer of a liquidated company's land pay the old company's Rs.36.7 lakh arrears for a new connection.