I. National Human Rights Commission
1. NHRC takes suo motu cognizance of reported suicide after alleged custodial torture in Delhi
The National Human Rights Commission (‘NHRC’) took suo motu cognizance of a media report concerning the alleged suicide of a man on 11-7-2025. The report indicates that the suicide occurred after the victim was subjected to alleged physical torture by police at Dwarka North Police Station, Delhi. Read more HERE.
2. NHRC to hear complaint on prevalent malnutrition in over 47,000 children in Telangana
While perusing a complaint highlighting the issue of prevalent malnutrition in over 47,000 children in Telangana, the NHRC directed that a copy of the complaint be sent to the authorities concerned and an Action Taken Report be submitted in the matter. It was further stated that the issue will be taken up for hearing by the NHRC during its Camp Sitting/Open Hearing on 28-07-2025 at Hyderabad, Telangana. Read more HERE.
3. NHRC to take up complaint regarding lack of government schools in 3,688 villages of Telangana
In a petition filed by an advocate and human rights activist seeking cognizance of the lack of government schools in 3,688 villages in Telangana, the NHRC, in a letter response, directed that the matter would be taken up for hearing during its Camp Sitting/Open Hearing on 28-07-2025 at Hyderabad, Telangana. Read more HERE.
4. NHRC takes suo motu cognizance of reported gang rape in a stationary train’s empty compartment in Panipat
The NHRC took suo motu cognizance of a media report dated 08-07-2025 highlighting an incident of 24-06-2025, where a woman was allegedly gang-raped in an empty compartment of a stationary train in Panipat, Haryana. Following the assault, she was reportedly thrown onto the rail tracks by the perpetrators, where a train subsequently ran over her leg. The victim is currently undergoing treatment at a hospital after being found on the railway tracks near Hindu College, Sonepat, on the night of 26-06-2025. Read more HERE.
5. Fake Cardiologist Scam at Damoh Hospital: NHRC uncovers several irregularities; recommends stringent actions
The NHRC released findings from its inquiry into a fake cardiologist at Mission Hospital in Damoh, Madhya Pradesh. The Commission had registered the case on 28-04-2025. Read more HERE.
6. NHRC takes suo motu cognizance of Jhalawar Government School collapse that claimed lives of 7 students and injured 28
The NHRC took suo motu cognizance of a media report concerning the collapse of a government school building on 25-07-2025 in Jhalawar district, Rajasthan. The incident reportedly resulted in the death of 7 students and injuries to 28 others. According to the media report, citing administrative negligence, the local residents had previously informed the District authorities about the dilapidated condition of the school building, but no action was taken. Read more HERE.
II. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal
1. ‘Mere tallying of certain entries does not make loose sheets as complete evidence of purchases and sales’: CESTAT sets aside excise duty demand
In an appeal filed by the appellant company challenging the demand confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority along with interest and penalty in the impugned order, the Bench of R. Muralidhar, Member (Judicial) and Rajeev Tandon, Member (Technical), stated that mere tallying of certain entries, does not make these delible pencil handwritten loose sheets (‘loose sheets’) to be complete evidence of the purchases and sales and other details pertaining to the appellant. Thus, the Tribunal held that the confirmed demands were not legally sustainable on merit and consequently, set aside the excise duty demand. Read more HERE.
2. ‘No service tax to be paid on upfront fee/premium for agreement to lease’; CESTAT sets aside penalty on DMRC
The Appellant, Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (‘DMRC’) challenged the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Rohtak (‘Commissioner’), wherein the demand of service tax on a portion of the amount received as “upfront fee” was upheld under the category of “Renting of Immovable Property Service” under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 (‘1994 Act’). The Tribunal comprising Binu Tamta, Member (Judicial) and Hemambika R. Priya, Member (Technical) held that definition of “Renting of Immovable Property” under Section 65(90-a) of the 1994 Act included only “leasing” and not an “agreement to lease”, thus “premium” or “upfront fee” received for entering into an “agreement to lease” was not liable to service tax. Further, the penalty imposed on DMRC under Section 78 of 1994 Act was set aside by the Tribunal. Read more HERE.
3. ‘Adjudicating authority cannot go beyond show-cause notice’; CESTAT sets aside order demanding Countervailing Duty on areca nuts processing machines
In a matter concerning short-fall in the payment of Counter Vailing Duty (‘CVD’) due to wrong classification of the imported machineries for processing of areca nuts, by the appellant-pan masala manufacturer, the Bench of Dr. Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial) and P.V. Subba Rao, Member (Technical) opined that the adjudicating authority cannot travel beyond the scope of show-cause notice and cannot confirm classification which was neither claimed by the appellant nor proposed by the department and therefore, it is not sustainable. Thus, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order demanding counter-vailing duty on areca nuts processing machines. Read more HERE.
4. ‘To be paid by distributors’: CESTAT sets aside order directing theatre owner to pay service tax for film screening
In an appeal by the appellant, who was the owner of M2K Cinemas, against a decision of the Commissioner of Central Tax, (Delhi West), whereby the appellant was directed to pay the service tax for film screening, the Division Bench of Binu Tamta, Member (Judicial) and Hemambika R. Priya, Member (Technical), stated that the impugned order for levy of service tax on the appellant is unsustainable and accordingly, set aside the impugned order. The Tribunal stated that the service tax is to be levied and paid by the distributor under ‘Copy Right Service’ for transfer of right by licence to screen the film in the appellant’s theatre. Read more HERE.
5. ‘Purchasing gold without bill insufficient to prove smuggling’; CESTAT sets aside penalty orders on jewellers
In a matter concerning the smuggling of gold, Dr. Rachna Gupta, Member (Judicial) opined that Appellants- jewellers in state of Haryana, had merely attempted to purchase gold from the accused to reduce costs while preparing jewellery for their customers. The appellants were unaware of any alleged illegal act of smuggling of gold. It was further observed that mere act of purchasing gold without bill is highly insufficient to confirm the grave allegations of conspiring the act of smuggling of gold. Read more HERE.
6. Commissioner of Customs is a stranger to contract of sale, cannot re-determine FOB value of export goods: CESTAT
In an appeal against the order dated 24-3-2011, passed by Commissioner of Customs Tughlakabad (impugned order), the two-member bench of Dilip Kumar,J. (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical member), held that the Commissioner had no authority to re-determine the Free on Board (‘FOB’) values of the export goods and accordingly set aside the impugned order. The Tribunal further stated that the Commissioner or any customs officer, being a stranger to the contract of sale, would have no authority to re-determine the transaction value under the FOB. Read more HERE.
III. National Company Law Tribunal
1. Resolution plans comply with IBC and CIRP Regulations’; NCLT approves Adani Properties acquisition of two HDIL assets
NCLT Mumbai: In a set of two applications filed by the Resolution Professional (‘RP’) under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (‘IBC’) seeking approval of the Resolution Plans for the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (‘CIRP’) of Housing Development & Infrastructure Limited (‘HDIL’) submitted by Adani Properties Private Limited (‘Adani’), the Two-Member Bench of Lakshmi Gurung (Judicial Member) and Hariharan Neelakanta Iyer (Technical Member), allowed the applications, holding that the Resolution Plans complied with the mandatory requirements under Section 30(2) of the IBC read with the applicable regulations of the CIRP Regulations. Read more HERE.
2. NCLT can invoke inherent powers to permit withdrawal of voluntary liquidation, when no third-party rights are affected
NCLT Chandigarh: In an instant application filed by the applicant, under Section 59, 60(5) and other applicable provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), read with Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Voluntary Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2017 (‘Voluntary Liquidation Regulations’) for withdrawal of voluntary liquidation of the Company, the Bench of Harnam Singh Thakur, Member (Judicial) and Shishir Agarwal, Member (Technical), stated that inexceptional cases, where the liquidation was initiated voluntarily and is now sought to be withdrawn by the same consenting stakeholders, and no third-party rights are affected, inherent powers of the Tribunal under Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 (‘NCLT Rules, 2016’) can be invoked to meet the ends of justice. Therefore, considering the peculiar facts and the revival prospects of the Company, the Tribunal exercised inherent jurisdiction under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, and allowed the withdrawal of the voluntary liquidation process. Read more HERE.
IV. Competition Commission of India
1. CCI imposed Rs. 6 lakhs penalty on the Federation of Publishers’ and Booksellers’ Associations in India
In a case filed by the informant under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (‘Act’) against the Federation of Publishers’ and Booksellers’ Associations in India (‘FPBAI’) and its former office-bearers, alleging anti-competitive practices, a 4-member bench of Ravneet Kaur (Chairperson), Anil Agrawal, Sweta Kakkad, and Deepak Anurag (Members), held the FPBAI guilty of contravention of the provisions of Section 3(3)(a) and 3(3)(b) read with Section 3(1) of the Act and the President and the Secretary of the FPBAI and the President/Chairman of Good Offices Committe (‘GOC’) liable under Section 48 of the Act, thereby imposing penalties amounting to Rs 6,32,954. Read more HERE.
V. Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property
1. PNB Fraud Case | ATFP upholds attachment of Nirav Modi’s aide’s New York property worth $ 7.1 million by ED
The bench of G.C Mishra and Rajesh Malhotra* (Members) were called upon to consider the appeal wherein the wife of one of the co-accused of PNB Fraud case, challenged the decision of Adjudicating Authority, whereby it confirmed the attachment of their New York based flat by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The Tribunal dismissed the appeal stating that, as per definition of Proceeds of Crime (POC) under Section 2 (1)(u) of the PMLA, 2002, the legislation entitles the attachment of proceeds of crime which are either generated as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence, or, the equivalent value, or, where such proceeds of crime is taken, or, held outside the country, then the property equivalent in value held within the country or abroad. The Tribunal opined that the attached property represented the value of proceeds of crime in terms of definition of Section 2 (1) (u) of PMLA, 2002 as ‘the value of any such property’ and was therefore liable for attachment under PMLA, 2002. Read more HERE.
2. Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property confirms attachment of Chanda Kochhar’s assets in ICICI-Videocon Loan case
In an appeal filed by Enforcement Directorate (‘ED’) challenging the Adjudicating Authority’s order dated 6-11-2020, wherein the authority refused to confirm attachment of a flat in Churchgate, Mumbai (‘the Flat’) and cash of Rs.10.5 Lakhs, the Bench of Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J. (Chairman) and Balesh Kumar (Member) found a clear chain of events indicating money laundering, including a Rs 64 crore transfer from Videocon to NRPL, a company controlled by Chanda Kochar’s husband. The long-standing association and financial interlinking between Chanda Kochhar’s husband and Videocon justified the attachment of property purchased with diverted funds. Thus, setting aside the Adjudicating Authority’s order, except for the attachment of Rs 10.5 lakhs, which was not confirmed, the Tribunal upheld all other parts of the Provisional Attachment Order dated 10-1-2020. Read more HERE.
VI. Securities Exchange Board of India
1. SEBI restrains JS Group from accessing securities market; prohibits buying/selling/dealing in Securities
An interim ex-parte order was passed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (‘SEBI’) against the Jane Street Group (‘JS Group’) comprising both Indian and its associated entities, alleging unauthorized use of their proprietary trading strategies in Indian options markets to manipulate the settlement prices of indices like BANKNIFTY and NIFTY. Ananth Narayan G (Whole Time Member), held that the Entities had violated Section 12-A(a), 12-A(b), and 12-A(c) of the SEBI Act, 1992 (‘SEBI Act’) and Regulations 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 4(1), 4(2)(a), and 4(2)(e) of the Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices (‘PFUTP’) Regulations, 2003 by using unfair trading practices. SEBI passed an order to impound Rs 4,843.57 crore of illegal gains and restrained the Entities from accessing the securities market and they were further prohibited from buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in securities, directly or indirectly. Read more HERE.
2. SEBI penalises Cressanda promoters for disclosure delay, imposes Rs 12 lakh fine
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (‘SEBI’) initiated adjudicating proceedings against Smart Infraproperties (P) Ltd. (‘Smart Infraproperties’) and Yuvika Tradewing LLP (‘Yuvika Tradewing’), for delayed disclosure under Regulations 29(1) and 29(2) read with Regulation 29(3) of Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers Regulations, 2011 (‘SAST Regulations’). Jai Sebastian (Adjudicating Officer) found both noticees guilty of non-compliance and failure to make timely disclosures regarding their share transactions in Cressanda Railway Solutions Ltd. (‘Cressanda’). Consequently, a penalty of Rs 10,00,000 was imposed on Smart Infraproperties and Rs 2,00,000 on Yuvika Tradewing. Read more HERE.
VI. Prevention of Money Laundering Appellate Tribunal
[2005 IPO Scam] PMLA Appellate Tribunal confirms provisional attachment of Karvy Consultant’s FDR of Rs 65 lakh
An appeal was filed by Karvy Consultants Ltd. (‘appellant’) against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (‘AA’) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (‘PMLA’) whereby the Provisional Attachment Order (‘PAO’) of FDR of Rs 65 lakh in the name of Karvy Consultants was confirmed. Balesh Kumar (Member) observed that the amount was nothing but proceeds of crime received from the key operators in the 2005 IPO Scam. Further, Karvy Consultants processed the applications of fictitious applicants for the purpose of transferring the allotted shares from them to the key operators and also received Rs 1 crore from the key operators. Read more HERE.
VIII. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission
1. Inside CERC’s ruling where DB Power Ltd. sought compensation over changes in law, force majeure events relating to Power Purchase Agreements
The present petition was filed under Section 79(1)(b) read with Section 79(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003, seeking adjustment of tariff on account of change in law and force majeure events affecting the project during the operating period to restore the petitioner, DB Power Limited, to the same economic position as the events had not occurred in terms of the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (‘TANGEDCO’) Power Purchase Agreements (‘PPA’). The three-member Bench of Jishnu Barua (‘Chairperson’), Ramesh Babu V (‘Member’), and Harish Dudani (‘Member’) disposed of the present petition to the extent of remand made by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (‘APTEL’) in its judgment dated 25-7-2023. Read more HERE.
IX. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
1. Read why ITAT rejected Congress Party’s appeal for exemption of Rs 199.15 Crores due to delay in filing ITR
In an appeal filed by Indian National Congress (‘INC’) against the impugned order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘CITA’) rejecting its claim for exemption under Section 13A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the IT Act’), the Two-Member Bench of Satbeer Singh Godara*, Judicial Member, and M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member, rejected the appeal, holding that since INC had not filed its income tax return (‘ITR’) in the prescribed time under Section 13A, it was not entitled for any deductions. Read more HERE.
