in

She Became CEO of Her Whole Company By Raising Her Hand and Saying This

Nobody cares what you want unless you speak up to tell them. That's how Tracy Panase became CEO of Just Between Friends.




in

KFC Sues Church's Texas Chicken Over 'Original Recipe'

The Colonel is not so happy with Church's choice of words in recent ads.




in

Bad Hires Can Cost You Thousands to Replace — and AI May Be to Blame. Try These 3 Ways to Ensure You Don't Fall Into Its Trap.

Over-relying on AI-driven hiring tools means taking human intuition out of the hiring process. The result? You miss out on top talent and risk stifling long-term growth.




in

Donald Trump Hires Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to Bring 'Drastic Change' to the U.S. Government — And Gives Them a 2 Year Deadline

Musk and Ramaswamy have to find ways to cut down on government spending and overall bureaucracy.




in

Businesses Are Reviving This 1800s Holiday Tradition With a 'Surprise and Delight' Factor That Drives Sales — Here's How One Buzzy Brand Is Making It Work

Brands like Straightaway Cocktails are putting their own spin on a practice you might remember from childhood.




in

This Strategy is the Key to Scaling Your Business — and Reducing Costs Along the Way

Scaling a business meaningfully and sustainably can be challenging and requires more than ambition. Offshore staffing enables the flexibility and efficiency needed to thrive in today's fast-paced market.




in

SEO Essentials for Businesses — 4 Key Tips for Driving Visibility and Growth

Want to attract and convert more customers? Here's what you need to know.




in

Why Your Small Business Growth Stalled — And How to Kickstart It Again

It's possible to scale sustainably even in uncertain times.




in

These Are the Franchise Industry's Top Suppliers Right Now

Looking for the right supplier to help your franchise? These are the industry's favorite banks, accountants, PR agencies, and more — picked by the 1,100 franchises that love them!




in

Apple's Next Device Will Reportedly Be Mounted on Your Wall: 'They Feel Like They're Going to Sell a Lot of These Things'

The device will arrive by March at the earliest, according to reports.




in

This Is How Much You Need to Earn to Buy a House in the U.S., According to a New Report

Plus, if you are in the market, these metro areas were found to be the least and most affordable to buy in.




in

Over a Million People Have Recently Joined Bluesky, the Ad-Free X Alternative and Threads Competitor

Bluesky has been seeing noticeable growth since the election, though its user numbers are nowhere close to Meta's X competitor, Threads.




in

Spotify teases a ‘super premium’ tier for superfans and upcoming video expansion in Q3 earnings call

Spotify CEO Daniel Ek has once again teased the company’s long-delayed HiFi or “super premium” tier, a higher-qualify subscription offering the streaming service first announced in 2021 and then failed to roll out. In the company’s third-quarter earnings call with investors on Wednesday, the exec suggested that such a product was still on the way, […]

© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.




in

Europe asks for input on banned uses of AI

The European Union is developing compliance guidance for its new law on AI. As part of that process it’s launched a consultation (here) seeking input in two areas. The first is how the law defines AI systems (as opposed to “simpler traditional” software). It’s asking people in the AI industry, business, academics, and civil society […]

© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.



  • AI
  • Government & Policy
  • eu ai act ai systems definition
  • eu ai act banned uses
  • In Brief

in

Mustaq Ahmad Ansari vs Union Of India & Ors. on 7 November, 2024

1. By the present petition, the petitioner prays for a direction to the respondents to transfer him to New Delhi from Jodhpur for further treatment at AIIMS, New Delhi.

2. Issue notice.

3. Notice is accepted by Mr.Shrey Sharawat, learned counsel on behalf of the respondents.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the Order dated 23.02.2022, passed by this Court in an earlier petition filed by the petitioner, being W.P.(C) 857/2022, the petitioner joined at STC, BSF, Jodhpur. AIIMS, Jodhpur, however, required all the medical documents and data of the petitioner's treatment at AIIMS, New Delhi to be forwarded to them. The respondents forwarded this request to AIIMS, New Delhi vide letter dated 28.04.2022, however, the said documents/data were not supplied by AIIMS, New Delhi to AIIMS, Jodhpur. The petitioner claims that because of this, he has to travel from Jodhpur to Delhi each time for his treatment at AIIMS, New Delhi. He, therefore, prays for being transferred back to Delhi in order to have proper treatment.




in

Neetu Yadav vs Union Of India And Anr. on 7 November, 2024

JYOTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)

1. This writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the Petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India laying a challenge to communication dated 24.06.2024, whereby her candidature for appointment to the post of TGT (Maths) has been cancelled by Respondent No.2/National Education Society for Tribal Students ('NESTS').

2. Factual matrix to the extent necessary is that NESTS is an autonomous organisation under the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India. NESTS published an advertisement in 2023 inviting applications for EMRS Staff Selection Exam (ESSE)-2023 for filling up various posts in Eklavya Model Residential School (EMRS) which included 686 posts of TGT (Maths). The eligibility conditions including essential educational qualifications for the post of TGT (Maths) were prescribed in the advertisement.




in

Ram Dhan Panchal & Anr. vs Union Of India & Ors. on 6 November, 2024

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, challenging the Orders dated 14.09.2024 and 26.10.2024 passed by the IG/Principal, CTC CRPF, Panihar, Gwalior, respondent no. 3 herein, directing the recovery of the alleged inadmissible training allowance granted to the petitioners.

2. In the Impugned Order dated 14.09.2024 itself, the petitioners have been granted an opportunity to make a representation against the same within fifteen days from the date of issuance of the said notice.




in

Smt Sapna Katayan vs J M Financial Asset Reconstruction Co ... on 12 November, 2024

CM APPL. 65920/2024 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 15698/2024

1. The present petition, filed under Article 226 read with Article 227 Constitution of India, seeks issuance of writ to the respondents directing respondent No.1 to not dispossess them from the premises in question. It is claimed that they are protected under Delhi Rent Control Act and the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI) cannot override the beneficial objective behind the enactment of Delhi Rent Control Act.




in

Rakshit Khurana And Ors vs Indus Tower Limited And Ors on 11 November, 2024

CM APPL.63468-469/2024

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CM APPL.63470/2024

2. The present application has been filed by the appellants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, „CPC‟) seeking condonation of 99 days delay in re-filing the appeal.

3. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 99 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.

4. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. FAO(COMM) 213/2024 & CM APPL.63467/2024




in

Himanshu Kapoor vs Shalini Kapoor on 7 November, 2024

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J (Oral)

1. The revision petition bearing CRL.REV.P. No. 444/2024 has been filed on behalf of Smt. Shalini Kapoor who is wife of the revisionist in CRL.REV.P. No. 685/2024. For the sake of convenience, this Court is treating the position of parties as per the petition bearing no. 444/2024. The brief facts leading to the instant revision petitions are as follows:

a) The petitioner and the respondent got married in the year 2010 as per the Hindu rituals and a child was born out of the wedlock in the year 2013.




in

Smt Shalini Kapoor vs Shri Himanshu Kapoor on 7 November, 2024

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J (Oral)

1. The revision petition bearing CRL.REV.P. No. 444/2024 has been filed on behalf of Smt. Shalini Kapoor who is wife of the revisionist in CRL.REV.P. No. 685/2024. For the sake of convenience, this Court is treating the position of parties as per the petition bearing no. 444/2024. The brief facts leading to the instant revision petitions are as follows:

a) The petitioner and the respondent got married in the year 2010 as per the Hindu rituals and a child was born out of the wedlock in the year 2013.




in

Modi-Mundipharma Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs Win Health Pharma Through Its ... on 13 November, 2024

13.11.2024 MINI PUSHKARNA, J:

I.A. No. 4172/2023 (Application under Section 124 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 read with Section 151 CPC seeking permission to challenge the validity of the defendants' trademark registrations)

1. The present application has been filed by the plaintiffs under Section 124 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("CPC") seeking permission to challenge the validity of the defendant‟s trademark registrations.




in

Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds)-1 vs M/S Adma Solutions Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly ... on 12 November, 2024

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

1. The instant appeal, at the instance of the Revenue, impugns order dated 28.05.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ["ITAT"], whereby, the ITAT ruled in favour of the respondent/Assessee and dismissed the appeal preferred against the order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ["CITA"]. The appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-

"A. Did the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ["ITAT"] fall into error in holding that the entity assessed was no longer in existence having regard to the circumstance that M/s. Infovision Information Services Pvt. Ltd. merely underwent a name change and had responded to the Revenue's notices, having regard to Section 292B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act"]?




in

Daljeet Singh vs M/S Johar Towers Pvt.Ltd. on 13 November, 2024

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI J.

CM APPL. 47591/2022

CM APPL. 34855/2023

By way of CM APPL. No. 47591/2022 filed under Order XLIII Rule 1A(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 („CPC‟), the appellant seeks recall of order dated 24.05.2012 made in the present proceedings, whereby the present regular first appeal alongwith RFA No.193/2003, were disposed-of as settled and satisfied in terms of the observations in that order; or, in the alternate, for modification of that order and a direction to the respondent to obtain a sanctioned building plan from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi („MCD‟) alongwith the structural building certificate to comply with that order. By way of CM APPL. No. 34855/2023 filed under section 151 CPC, the respondent seeks dismissal of CM APPL. No. 47591/2022 and modification of order dated 31.01.2023 passed by this court, whereby the respondent was directed to take steps for regularisation of property being the Third Floor of property bearing No. B-2/88, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi („suit property‟).




in

National Highway Authority Of India vs Rajesh Kaptyaksh on 12 November, 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Arbitration Appeal No.9 of 2024 along with Arbitration Appeal Nos.86 & 88 of 2024 Date of decision: 12.11.2024

1. Arbitration Appeal No.9 of 2024 National Highway Authority of India. ...Appellant.

Versus Rajesh Kaptyaksh. ...Respondent. 2. Arbitration Appeal No.86 of 2024 National Highway Authority of India. ...Appellant. Versus Narain Singh. ...Respondent. 3. Arbitration Appeal No.88 of 2024 National Highway Authority of India. ...Appellant. Versus Babu Ram. ...Respondent. Coram:




in

Union Bank Of India vs State Of Karnataka on 13 November, 2024

(BY SRI B.V.ACHARYA, SPL.PP A/W SRI V.G.BHANUPRAKASH, AAG AND SRI THEJESH P., HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-4;

SRI P.PRASANNA KUMAR, SPL.PP FOR R-5;

PROF.RAVI VARMA KUMAR, SR.ADVOCATE FOR SRI ADITYA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R-6;

SRI SUDHANVA D.S., ADVOCATE FOR I.A.NO. 1/2024 FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT ) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECITON 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 3 TO TRANSFER AND ENTRUST THE INVESTIGATION OF THE CASE CRIME NO. 118/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE - Q, LEVELING OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 149, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE TO THE RESPONDENT NO.4-CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND FURTHER DIRECT THE R-4 TO CARRY OUT SPEEDY AND EXPEDITIOUS INVESTIGATION IN THE AFOREMENTIONED CASE WITHIN A SPECIFIED TIME.




in

M/S R.D Sales Corporation And Anr vs Anoop Singh Gill on 8 November, 2024

This order shall dispose of four revision pe&&ons &tled above, as all of them are between same par&es and pertain to the same demised premises. In order to avoid confusion, par&es shall be referred as "landlord" and "tenant", i.e. as per their status before the trial Court.

2.1 Admi*edly, the demised premises, i.e. Shed No.433-A, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Chandigarh was originally allo*ed to Smt. Swaraj Katari by Chandigarh Small Industries Department Corpora&on Limited. M/s R.D. Sales Corpora&on through its proprietor Rakesh Gupta (pe oner herein) was inducted as tenant in the demised premises on the right side por&on to the extent of 12 Ft. X 60 Ft., vide rent note dated 19.10.1994 on monthly rent of ₹6,000/- including water and electricity charges, for a period of 11 months. Said rent was later on Page no.2 out of 47 pages 2 of 47 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:146797 CR No.1662 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146797 CR No.1663 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146800 CR No.1664 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146802 CR No.6078 of 2018 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146806 enhanced to ₹8,500/-.




in

M/S R D Sales Corporation Etc vs Anoop Singh Gill on 8 November, 2024

This order shall dispose of four revision pe&&ons &tled above, as all of them are between same par&es and pertain to the same demised premises. In order to avoid confusion, par&es shall be referred as "landlord" and "tenant", i.e. as per their status before the trial Court.

2.1 Admi*edly, the demised premises, i.e. Shed No.433-A, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Chandigarh was originally allo*ed to Smt. Swaraj Katari by Chandigarh Small Industries Department Corpora&on Limited. M/s R.D. Sales Corpora&on through its proprietor Rakesh Gupta (pe oner herein) was inducted as tenant in the demised premises on the right side por&on to the extent of 12 Ft. X 60 Ft., vide rent note dated 19.10.1994 on monthly rent of ₹6,000/- including water and electricity charges, for a period of 11 months. Said rent was later on Page no.2 out of 47 pages 2 of 47 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:146797 CR No.1662 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146797 CR No.1663 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146800 CR No.1664 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146802 CR No.6078 of 2018 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146806 enhanced to ₹8,500/-.




in

M/S R.D Sales Corporation And Anr vs Anoop Singh Gill on 8 November, 2024

This order shall dispose of four revision pe&&ons &tled above, as all of them are between same par&es and pertain to the same demised premises. In order to avoid confusion, par&es shall be referred as "landlord" and "tenant", i.e. as per their status before the trial Court.

2.1 Admi*edly, the demised premises, i.e. Shed No.433-A, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Chandigarh was originally allo*ed to Smt. Swaraj Katari by Chandigarh Small Industries Department Corpora&on Limited. M/s R.D. Sales Corpora&on through its proprietor Rakesh Gupta (pe oner herein) was inducted as tenant in the demised premises on the right side por&on to the extent of 12 Ft. X 60 Ft., vide rent note dated 19.10.1994 on monthly rent of ₹6,000/- including water and electricity charges, for a period of 11 months. Said rent was later on Page no.2 out of 47 pages 2 of 47 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:146797 CR No.1662 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146797 CR No.1663 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146800 CR No.1664 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146802 CR No.6078 of 2018 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146806 enhanced to ₹8,500/-.




in

M/S R.D. Sales Corporation And Anr vs Anoop Singh Gill on 8 November, 2024

This order shall dispose of four revision pe&&ons &tled above, as all of them are between same par&es and pertain to the same demised premises. In order to avoid confusion, par&es shall be referred as "landlord" and "tenant", i.e. as per their status before the trial Court.

2.1 Admi*edly, the demised premises, i.e. Shed No.433-A, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Chandigarh was originally allo*ed to Smt. Swaraj Katari by Chandigarh Small Industries Department Corpora&on Limited. M/s R.D. Sales Corpora&on through its proprietor Rakesh Gupta (pe oner herein) was inducted as tenant in the demised premises on the right side por&on to the extent of 12 Ft. X 60 Ft., vide rent note dated 19.10.1994 on monthly rent of ₹6,000/- including water and electricity charges, for a period of 11 months. Said rent was later on Page no.2 out of 47 pages 2 of 47 Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:146797 CR No.1662 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146797 CR No.1663 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146800 CR No.1664 of 2020 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146802 CR No.6078 of 2018 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:146806 enhanced to ₹8,500/-.




in

Vinod Mahabiprasad Gupta vs Saidpur Jute Co. Ltd. And Ors on 12 November, 2024

judgment and order dated 12 January 2023 passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court dismissing (A-1) Appeal Nos.396/2015 and 95/2016 and confirming the eviction decree dated 25 June 2015 passed by the Small Causes Court in R.A.E. Suit No. 147A/306 of 1996. By decreeing the suit, the Small Causes Court has directed the Revision Applicants (Defendant Nos.1 to 8) to hand over possession of the suit premises to the Plaintiff.

B. FACTS 2) Plaintiff claims to be the owner of Godown No. 63 in

Sitaram Mill, Delisle Road, Mumbai-400 001 are the suit premises. By Agreement dated 2 July 1975 entered into between the Plaintiff- Saidpur Jute Co. Ltd and Defendant No.1-MBK Enterprises, Plaintiff granted lease in respect of portion of the Godown No. 63 admeasuring 8800 sq. ft (suit premises) in favour of Defendant No.1 for a period of 60 years at monthly rent of Rs.4,488/-. Plaintiff found Defendant No.2-Mid-Day Publications Pvt. Ltd. in occupation of the suit premises and accordingly filed R.A.E. Suit No. 147A/306 of 1996 on 9 February 1996 seeking recovery of possession of the suit premises on the grounds of (i) unlawful subletting by Defendant No.1 to Defendant No.2 (ii) commission of acts contrary to the provisions of Section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act and (iii) carrying out structural additions and alterations of permanent nature in the suit premises and erecting structures of permanent nature without 12 November 2024 Neeta Sawant CRA-120-2023-CRA-215-2023-FC obtaining written permission from Plaintiffs. Defendant No.1 appeared in the suit and filed Written Statement contending that under the covenants of lease, it was entitled to grant sublease in respect of the suit premises and that accordingly Defendant No.1 have subleased the premises to M/s. Mangla International Pvt. Ltd and Ors. who are associate companies having Directors from the same family and the said companies in turn had given the premises on license to Defendant No.2-Mid-Day. Defendant No.1 denied the allegations regarding to commission of act contrary to the provisions of section 108(o) of the Transfer of Property Act, as well as, erecting of structure of permanent nature without the consent of the landlord. Defendant No.2-Mid-Day also filed its Written Statement admitting its use and occupation of the suit premises from July 1995 but pleaded that such occupation was under agreement with Defendant No.1. Mid-Day also denied the allegations in the plaint.




in

Vinod Mahabiprasad Gupta vs Saidpur Jute Co. Ltd. And Ors on 12 November, 2024

judgment and order dated 12 January 2023 passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court dismissing (A-1) Appeal Nos.396/2015 and 95/2016 and confirming the eviction decree dated 25 June 2015 passed by the Small Causes Court in R.A.E. Suit No. 147A/306 of 1996. By decreeing the suit, the Small Causes Court has directed the Revision Applicants (Defendant Nos.1 to 8) to hand over possession of the suit premises to the Plaintiff.

B. FACTS 2) Plaintiff claims to be the owner of Godown No. 63 in

Sitaram Mill, Delisle Road, Mumbai-400 001 are the suit premises. By Agreement dated 2 July 1975 entered into between the Plaintiff- Saidpur Jute Co. Ltd and Defendant No.1-MBK Enterprises, Plaintiff granted lease in respect of portion of the Godown No. 63 admeasuring 8800 sq. ft (suit premises) in favour of Defendant No.1 for a period of 60 years at monthly rent of Rs.4,488/-. Plaintiff found Defendant No.2-Mid-Day Publications Pvt. Ltd. in occupation of the suit premises and accordingly filed R.A.E. Suit No. 147A/306 of 1996 on 9 February 1996 seeking recovery of possession of the suit premises on the grounds of (i) unlawful subletting by Defendant No.1 to Defendant No.2 (ii) commission of acts contrary to the provisions of Section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act and (iii) carrying out structural additions and alterations of permanent nature in the suit premises and erecting structures of permanent nature without 12 November 2024 Neeta Sawant CRA-120-2023-CRA-215-2023-FC obtaining written permission from Plaintiffs. Defendant No.1 appeared in the suit and filed Written Statement contending that under the covenants of lease, it was entitled to grant sublease in respect of the suit premises and that accordingly Defendant No.1 have subleased the premises to M/s. Mangla International Pvt. Ltd and Ors. who are associate companies having Directors from the same family and the said companies in turn had given the premises on license to Defendant No.2-Mid-Day. Defendant No.1 denied the allegations regarding to commission of act contrary to the provisions of section 108(o) of the Transfer of Property Act, as well as, erecting of structure of permanent nature without the consent of the landlord. Defendant No.2-Mid-Day also filed its Written Statement admitting its use and occupation of the suit premises from July 1995 but pleaded that such occupation was under agreement with Defendant No.1. Mid-Day also denied the allegations in the plaint.




in

Sheshmani Nath Tripathi (S.N. Tripathi ... vs Shri Dinesh Rawat, The Returned ... on 13 November, 2024

1. Heard the petitioner who appears in person as well as Shri Skand Bajpai, learned counsel for the respondent, on the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC more particularly the provisions of Sub Rule (a) and (d) of Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC.

2. Arguing on Sub Rule (a) of Order 7 Rule 11 the argument of the Shri Skand Bajpai is that the said sub rule pertains to rejection of a plaint where it does not disclose a cause of action.

3. Reference has been made to Section 36 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 1951') to contend that the said provision pertains to scrutiny of nomination. Sub Section (1) of Section 36 of the Act, 1951 provides for examination of the nomination papers of all candidates which power has been given to the candidates, the election agents, one proposer of each candidate and one other person duly authorized in writing by each candidate but no other person; Sub Section (2) of Section 36 of the Act, 1951 provides for the nomination papers to be examined by the returning officer and to decide all objections which may be made to any nomination and thereafter to reject any nomination either on his own motion or on such objection as might have been preferred.




in

Public Eye vs Union Of India on 7 November, 2024

Dr. A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

These writ petitions raise an interesting question as regards the scope, content and extent of the right to freedom of speech and expression enuring to the media when they report facts about ongoing criminal investigations or the proceedings in cases pending adjudication before the various adjudicatory forums in the country. The writ petitions were initially considered by a Full Bench of this Court. However, by an order dated 24.05.2018, the Full Bench took the view that in the light of an earlier decision of another Full Bench of this Court in S. Sudin v. Union of India and Others - [2015 (2) KLT 296 (FB)], these matters needed to be referred to a Larger Bench of five Judges for consideration. It is thus, and pursuant to an order dated 02.09.2024 of the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice, that these matters are now before us.




in

Jinneng Clean Energy Technology Ltd vs Sunedison Energy Holding (Singapore) ... on 2 September, 2024

The above Original Petition has been filed by the successful Award Holder under Chapter I Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to recognize the Final Award dated 22.02.2021 and the addendum to the Final Award dated 08.03.2021.

______________ Page No 3 of 184 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.)No.186 of 2023

2. The respective legal contentions of the Petitioner (the claimant) and the Award Debtor Respondent No.2 (the Engineering Company) and the Award Debtor Respondent No.3 (the Project Company) shall be adverted after narrating the facts of the case. I propose to narrate the facts in two parts.




in

Jmc-Mske(Jv),,Ahmedabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3),, ... on 7 November, 2024

These four appeals filed by two separate assessees have arisen from separate appellate orders passed by learned Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad for the assessment years, 2010-11 & 2011-12.

2. Since facts and issues involved in all these four appeals are similar which is agreed to by both the rival parties before us and that these four appeals were heard together, we deem it appropriate to dispose of all these appeals by this consolidated order for the sake of brevity and convenience. We will first take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 2498/Ahd/2013 for A.Y. 2010-11, and our decision in this appeal shall apply mutatis mutandis to remaining three appeals.




in

Bgsctpl- Mskel Consortium,,Ahmedabad vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1),, ... on 7 November, 2024

These four appeals filed by two separate assessees have arisen from separate appellate orders passed by learned Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad for the assessment years, 2010-11 & 2011-12.

2. Since facts and issues involved in all these four appeals are similar which is agreed to by both the rival parties before us and that these four appeals were heard together, we deem it appropriate to dispose of all these appeals by this consolidated order for the sake of brevity and convenience. We will first take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 2498/Ahd/2013 for A.Y. 2010-11, and our decision in this appeal shall apply mutatis mutandis to remaining three appeals.




in

Bgsctpl- Mskel (Jv),Ahmedabad vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1),, ... on 7 November, 2024

These four appeals filed by two separate assessees have arisen from separate appellate orders passed by learned Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad for the assessment years, 2010-11 & 2011-12.

2. Since facts and issues involved in all these four appeals are similar which is agreed to by both the rival parties before us and that these four appeals were heard together, we deem it appropriate to dispose of all these appeals by this consolidated order for the sake of brevity and convenience. We will first take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 2498/Ahd/2013 for A.Y. 2010-11, and our decision in this appeal shall apply mutatis mutandis to remaining three appeals.




in

Jmc-Mske(Jv),,Ahmedabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3),, ... on 7 November, 2024

These four appeals filed by two separate assessees have arisen from separate appellate orders passed by learned Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad for the assessment years, 2010-11 & 2011-12.

2. Since facts and issues involved in all these four appeals are similar which is agreed to by both the rival parties before us and that these four appeals were heard together, we deem it appropriate to dispose of all these appeals by this consolidated order for the sake of brevity and convenience. We will first take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 2498/Ahd/2013 for A.Y. 2010-11, and our decision in this appeal shall apply mutatis mutandis to remaining three appeals.




in

M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. ... vs The Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 12 November, 2024

These cross appeals are filed by the Revenue and Assessee against order dated 12.03.2020 passed by the CIT(A)-1, Ahmedabad for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :-

ITA Nos.345 & 383/Ahd/2020 Assessment Years: 2012-13 "(1) The ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law in deleting the transfer pricing adjustment made in respect of Corporate guarantee fees of Rs.60,83,440/-

(2) The id. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law in deleting the interest disallowance of Rs.1,64,86,560/- u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act.




in

The Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... vs M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. , ... on 12 November, 2024

These cross appeals are filed by the Revenue and Assessee against order dated 12.03.2020 passed by the CIT(A)-1, Ahmedabad for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :-

ITA Nos.345 & 383/Ahd/2020 Assessment Years: 2012-13 "(1) The ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law in deleting the transfer pricing adjustment made in respect of Corporate guarantee fees of Rs.60,83,440/-

(2) The id. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law in deleting the interest disallowance of Rs.1,64,86,560/- u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act.




in

The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... vs Shri Karimbhai Kamrudinbhai Makhani, ... on 11 November, 2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.(खो और ज).सं./IT(SS)A Nos.103 -108/RJT/20 17 ( नधारण वष /Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. Flat No.201, Block No.37, Race Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Course Park, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आ.(खो और ज). सं./IT(SS)A Nos.1 25-130/RJT/20 17 ( नधारणवष / Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Karim K. Makhani Assistant Commissioner of Income C/o SADP & Co. Chart ered Vs. Tax, Central Circle-1, 2nd Floor, Accountants, BB House, 5- Amruta Estate, Room No.215, M.G Collegewadi, Near Kathiyawad Road, Rajkot-360001 Gymkhana, R ajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.210 -213/RJT/2018 ( नधारण वष /Assessm ent Years: (2 008-09 to 20 09 -10, 2011-12 & 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. 37/301, Race Course Park, Airport Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) IT(SS)A Nos.103-108/Rjt/2017, 125-130/Rjt/2017 & ITA Nos.210-




in

The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... vs Shri Karimbhai Kamrudinbhai Makhani, ... on 11 November, 2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.(खो और ज).सं./IT(SS)A Nos.103 -108/RJT/20 17 ( नधारण वष /Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. Flat No.201, Block No.37, Race Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Course Park, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आ.(खो और ज). सं./IT(SS)A Nos.1 25-130/RJT/20 17 ( नधारणवष / Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Karim K. Makhani Assistant Commissioner of Income C/o SADP & Co. Chart ered Vs. Tax, Central Circle-1, 2nd Floor, Accountants, BB House, 5- Amruta Estate, Room No.215, M.G Collegewadi, Near Kathiyawad Road, Rajkot-360001 Gymkhana, R ajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.210 -213/RJT/2018 ( नधारण वष /Assessm ent Years: (2 008-09 to 20 09 -10, 2011-12 & 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. 37/301, Race Course Park, Airport Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) IT(SS)A Nos.103-108/Rjt/2017, 125-130/Rjt/2017 & ITA Nos.210-




in

The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... vs Shri Karimbhai Kamrudinbhai Makhani, ... on 11 November, 2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.(खो और ज).सं./IT(SS)A Nos.103 -108/RJT/20 17 ( नधारण वष /Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. Flat No.201, Block No.37, Race Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Course Park, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आ.(खो और ज). सं./IT(SS)A Nos.1 25-130/RJT/20 17 ( नधारणवष / Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Karim K. Makhani Assistant Commissioner of Income C/o SADP & Co. Chart ered Vs. Tax, Central Circle-1, 2nd Floor, Accountants, BB House, 5- Amruta Estate, Room No.215, M.G Collegewadi, Near Kathiyawad Road, Rajkot-360001 Gymkhana, R ajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.210 -213/RJT/2018 ( नधारण वष /Assessm ent Years: (2 008-09 to 20 09 -10, 2011-12 & 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. 37/301, Race Course Park, Airport Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) IT(SS)A Nos.103-108/Rjt/2017, 125-130/Rjt/2017 & ITA Nos.210-




in

The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... vs Shri Karimbhai Kamrudinbhai Makhani, ... on 11 November, 2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.(खो और ज).सं./IT(SS)A Nos.103 -108/RJT/20 17 ( नधारण वष /Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. Flat No.201, Block No.37, Race Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Course Park, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आ.(खो और ज). सं./IT(SS)A Nos.1 25-130/RJT/20 17 ( नधारणवष / Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Karim K. Makhani Assistant Commissioner of Income C/o SADP & Co. Chart ered Vs. Tax, Central Circle-1, 2nd Floor, Accountants, BB House, 5- Amruta Estate, Room No.215, M.G Collegewadi, Near Kathiyawad Road, Rajkot-360001 Gymkhana, R ajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.210 -213/RJT/2018 ( नधारण वष /Assessm ent Years: (2 008-09 to 20 09 -10, 2011-12 & 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. 37/301, Race Course Park, Airport Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) IT(SS)A Nos.103-108/Rjt/2017, 125-130/Rjt/2017 & ITA Nos.210-




in

Shri Karimbhai Kamrudinbhai ... vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 11 November, 2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.(खो और ज).सं./IT(SS)A Nos.103 -108/RJT/20 17 ( नधारण वष /Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. Flat No.201, Block No.37, Race Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Course Park, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आ.(खो और ज). सं./IT(SS)A Nos.1 25-130/RJT/20 17 ( नधारणवष / Assessment Years: (2007-08 to 20 12 -13) Karim K. Makhani Assistant Commissioner of Income C/o SADP & Co. Chart ered Vs. Tax, Central Circle-1, 2nd Floor, Accountants, BB House, 5- Amruta Estate, Room No.215, M.G Collegewadi, Near Kathiyawad Road, Rajkot-360001 Gymkhana, R ajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.210 -213/RJT/2018 ( नधारण वष /Assessm ent Years: (2 008-09 to 20 09 -10, 2011-12 & 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner of Income Karim K. Makhani Tax, Central Circle-1, "Amruta Vs. 37/301, Race Course Park, Airport Estate", 2nd Floor, M.G. Road, Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 थायीले खासं . /जीआइआरसं . /P AN/GIR No.: AMBPM 6370 J (अपीलाथ /Assessee) ( यथ /Respondent) IT(SS)A Nos.103-108/Rjt/2017, 125-130/Rjt/2017 & ITA Nos.210-