News
Secondment of expats from overseas group entities when is not liable to GST
23 July 2025
The Karnataka High Court has on 15 July 2025 allowed the writ petition against the demand of IGST in the case involving secondment of expats by the assessee from the overseas group entities. The Department in the case Alstom Transport India Limited v. Commissioner had alleged that the activity amounted to receipt of manpower and recruitment services from abroad and was thus liable to IGST under reverse charge. The assessee was represented by Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan Attorneys here.
Patent infringement – Denial of interim injunction for absence of essential elements of suit patent, non-working of the patent and delay in filing the suit
17 July 2025
The Delhi High Court dismissed Conqueror Innovations’s plea for an interim injunction against Xiaomi, finding no prima facie case of patent infringement over its 'Find Device' feature. The Court held the balance of convenience favored Xiaomi, which has sold such devices since 2014, and noted that any harm to the plaintiffs could be compensated by damages. The case will proceed to trial. The defendant was represented by Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan Attorneys here.
Substitution of assets attached by the Enforcement Directorate under PMLA: SC
07 July 2025
In a recent case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has passed an order (‘Order’) , allowing the substitution of provisionally attached assets with unencumbered, marketable commercial units offered by the Petitioner subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions.
Refund of IGST on exports – Rule 96(10) stands omitted prospectively but is not applicable to pending proceedings
01 July 2025
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 to pending proceedings/cases where final adjudication has not taken place. Number of assessees were represented by Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan Attorneys here.
Discharge of a person in predicate offence is not a bar on investigation under PMLA
10 June 2025
In this case[1], the Petitioner was implicated in offence of commission of offence of illicit manufacturing, marketing and transportation of a cough syrup under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘NDPS Act’) through two complaints filed by the Narcotics Control Bureau (‘NCB’) before the Special NDPS Court, Jammu (‘Trial Court’).
Supplies to merchant exporters qualify as ‘export of goods’ – GST Council urged to consider exempting compensation cess on such supplies
22 May 2025
The Gujarat High Court has observed that supplies to merchant exporters also qualify as ‘export of goods’. It was thus held that the assessee manufacturer is not liable to pay compensation cess at the rate of 160% on the supply of goods, i.e. branded tobacco products, to the merchant exporters for exports.
Patents – Section 3(b) is the intent principle and not the effect or harm principle
15 May 2025
The Calcutta High Court has set aside the rejection of grant of patent for an invention titled ‘A device and method for generating and delivery of a Nicotine Aerosol to a user’, where the invention provided a parallel design device that delivers nicotine to the users without burning or heating of tobacco and/or nicotine.
NCLAT cannot condone delay in filing appeal beyond 15 days Introduction
08 May 2025
Recently, the Supreme Court vide its Order dated 7 May 2025 passed in the case of Tata Steel Ltd. v. Raj Kumar Banerjee and Ors. in C.A. No. 408 of 2023, while allowing the appeal, reiterated that the NCLAT cannot condone any delay in filing an appeal beyond the period of 15 days as stipulated under the statute.
No interest and penalty on IGST on imports, before amendment to Customs Tariff Section 3(12)
24 April 2025
The Bombay High Court has held that interest and penalty are not leviable on IGST not paid on imports, before the amendment to Section 3(12) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024. The Court relied upon its earlier decision in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra which was upheld by the Supreme Court.