Tag: Bombay High Court

The Applicable Custom Duty Shall Be The One Which Was In Force When The Bills Of Entry Are Presented

The Applicable Custom Duty Shall Be The One Which Was In Force When The Bills Of Entry Are Presented

In a recent ruling, a Division Bench of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court comprising of Hon’ble Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice Jitendra Jain clarified a crucial aspect of customs law, specifically the time when the

Latest Development On Circulars For Lookout, Wilful Defaulters And Fraud

Download PPT

Maharashtra Stamp Act Refund of Stamp Duty Cannots Be Denied on Mere Technical Grounds

Maharashtra Stamp Act | Refund of Stamp Duty Cannot Be Denied on Mere Technical Grounds

The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”), in a recent decision[i], upheld and relayed an observation made in its earlier decision of Committee-GFIL v. Libra Buildtech Private Limited & Ors.[ii], wherein the Hon’ble SC observed that: “19.

Bombay High Court

Bombay High Court Holds That Employees Cannot Subsequently Challenge Their Promotion After Accepting The Same Without Demur

In a recent judgment, passed in the matter of Shri Shripad Dwarkanath Gupte and Ors. v. Union of India[1] the Hon’ble Bombay High Court (“HC”) elucidated that employees who have accepted promotions based on grades,

Upholding Plaints Seeking Urgent Relief Without Pre-Institution Mediation Barriers

Upholding Plaints Seeking Urgent Relief Without Pre-Institution Mediation Barriers

In a recent judgement[i], the Hon’ble Bombay High Court (“HC”), dismissed an application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“CPC”), by Chemco Plast (“Defendant”) seeking rejection of a trademark

Strict Scrutiny Standard to be adopted for Deceptively Similar Trademarks in Pharmaceutical Product Sector

Strict Scrutiny Standard to be adopted for Deceptively Similar Trademarks in Pharmaceutical Product Sector

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court (“HC”) recently held[i] that a trademark cannot be granted, by holding that structurally & phonetically similar trademark ought not to be registered for a drug of similar aliment, having a

1 2 3