top of page
Newsletters & Legal Updates
Search
Court rules that Trademark Office cannot demand proof of market use or fame for marks filed on "proposed to be used" basis. Rejection orders must explain reasoning clearly.
The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Kapil Goyal vs. The Registrar of Trade Marks [C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 15/2025] dated January 9, 2026 held that the Registrar of Trade Marks erred in refusing registration of the trademark "DOUBLE-CHOICE" for rice, flour and preparations made from cereals in Class 30. The Court held that for trademark applications filed on a proposed-to-be-used basis under Section 18(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, evidence of acquired distinctiveness or seconda
1 day ago
Supreme Court holds that High Courts cannot impose timelines on investigation or grant protection from arrest while dismissing quashing petitions.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of U.P. & Anr. vs. Mohd Arshad Khan & Anr. [ Criminal Appeal Nos. 5610-5612 of 2025 ] dated December 19, 2025 held that High Courts, while declining to quash criminal proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 of the CrPC, cannot simultaneously impose fixed timelines for completion of investigation or grant blanket protection from arrest till cognizance is taken by the concerned court. The Court held that tim
Jan 2
Court holds that retrospective cancellation affecting customer's input tax credit requires consideration of unintended consequences
The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Ruby Bansal vs. C.G.S.T. Delhi East Commissioner & Anr. [ W.P.(C) 18496/2025 ] dated December 5, 2025 held that in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court can extend time for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act beyond the statutory limitation period where the delay is explained and the petitioner was pursuing remedies before constitutional courts. The Court set aside the First Appe
Dec 18, 2025
High Court quashes provisional attachment of bank accounts issued without proper reasons under Section 83 GST Act
The Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in M/s Soraza Recycling Private Limited vs. Union Of India And 4 Others [ Writ Tax No. 4630 of 2025 ] dated September 22, 2025 held that provisional attachment orders under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 issued without proper reasons and based merely on the ground that proceedings have been launched under Section 74 are perverse, arbitrary, and without any basis in law. The Court held that Section
Oct 2, 2025
Chhattisgarh High Court quashes provisional attachment order issued without reasons by GST Department
The Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in M/s R.B. Drillers And Construction vs. State Of Chhattisgarh, Directorate Of Jal Jeevan Mission...
Sep 30, 2025
Allahabad High Court rules that Section 161 GST Act cannot be used to recall appellate orders merely because SLP filed before Supreme Court
The Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in M/s Opasil Pigments And Chemicals (P) Ltd. vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [ Writ...
Sep 30, 2025
High Court Orders GST Pre-Deposit Refund Despite Section 54 Limitation
The Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in M/S. GTL Infrastructure Limited vs The State of Jharkhand & Others W.P. (T) No. 5035 of...
Sep 3, 2025
Chhattisgarh High Court Allows GST Recovery Stay Through Pre-Deposit and Undertaking Until Tribunal Constitution
The Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in M/s Archita Soap And Chemical LLP vs Joint Commissioner (Appeals) State Tax &...
Sep 1, 2025
High Court Rules on GST Refund Claims Beyond Limitation Period for Invalid Ocean Freight Tax
The Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati in M/s Louis Dreyfus Company Private Limited vs Union of India & Others...
Aug 30, 2025
Join Our Community for Exclusive Content
bottom of page