The Delhi High Court has ruled on a significant patent law question regarding whether making a fungicide stable at high temperatures constitutes an enhancement in efficacy under Section 3(d) of the Patents Act, 1970.

The Madras High Court has observed that a statutory appellate remedy under Section 117-A of the Patents Act, 1970 is not provided for against an order-in-review issued under Section 77(1)(f).

The Madras High Court has quashed the Order passed by the Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs refusing to grant patent in respect of a Divisional Application on the ground that the same...

The Delhi High Court has directed for grant of a patent titled ‘Reversible 2-Dimensional Pre-/Post-Filtering for Lapped Biorthogonal Transform', which was related to a digital...

The Madras High Court has set aside the decision of the Patent Office rejecting the patent application on grounds that the claimed invention was obvious and does not satisfy the requirements of Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act...

The CESTAT New Delhi has held that classification of goods by the importer, even if the same is not in conformity with re-assessment by the proper officer or even if it is held to be not correct...

The Larger Bench of the CESTAT has held that the hearing and resolution of the issue referred to the Larger Bench is be continued at the instance of the Intervener even if the case...

Noting that the term used in Section 54(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 is 'may', the Madras High Court has observed that the time limit fixed under Section 54(1) is directory in nature and is not mandatory.

The Supreme Court has on 20 November 2024 held that the telecom companies are entitled to avail Cenvat credit of the central excise duty paid on towers...

The CESTAT New Delhi has held that front cover, middle cover and back covers of cellular phones which house various components of the phone and also provide for dissipation of the heat.

The Supreme Court has established critical procedural requirements for arrests under the CGST Act, mandating that orders under Section 69 must be communicated to the accused before arrest to protect their right to seek anticipatory bail. This landmark ruling addresses the balance between investigative powers and fundamental rights to liberty, while also clarifying limitations on interim relief when pre-arrest bail petitions are dismissed as non-maintainable.

The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court has referred to the Larger Bench the question of issuance of consolidated show cause notices by the Revenue department for multiple financial years/tax periods.

The Calcutta High Court has ruled on a critical distinction in GST proceedings regarding the timing requirements for demand orders under Section 73 of the CGST Act. When an order is digitally signed within the limitation period but uploaded to the portal after the statutory deadline, does this constitute a valid issuance or a procedural violation that invalidates the demand?

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has granted interim relief to the assessee in a case where the Revenue department had alleged that the supply of free electricity/power @12%...

The Madras High Court has delivered a significant ruling on the constitutional limits of the GST Council's authority, specifically addressing whether this body possesses the power to ratify notifications issued by the Central Government under the CGST Act. The judgment examines the scope of powers available to constitutional and statutory bodies, establishing critical precedents for tax administration in India.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the interest and penalty, recovered by a foreman, in relation to default in payment of installments...

Observing that statutory provision contained in the principal legislation that is Section 74(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, is mandatory, the Allahabad High Court has held that the use of the word ‘may’ in Rule 142(1A)...

The Supreme Court has ruled on whether the assembly of imported photocopier modules in warehouses constitutes 'manufacture' under the Central Excise Act, examining the distinction between customs duty classification and excise duty liability. This case addresses the critical question of when simple assembly operations cross the threshold into manufacturing activity for tax purposes.

The GSTAT Bench at Thane has dismissed Revenue department’s appeal filed against the appellate authority’s decision allowing exemption under Sl. No. 9 of Notification No. 02/2017-CT(R) to the assessee who was using manufacturer’s name...

The Gujarat High Court has held that Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 would stand omitted prospectively but would not be applicable...