Read Time: 10 minutes

1. [Service Tax] The Supreme Court last week held that while considering various services rendered by a company like erection, installation and commissioning of goods at a customers’ site, if it incidentally provides the services of drawing, design etc., it cannot be said that the service rendered by it was of a consulting engineer. Court held that keeping this in mind, service tax cannot be levied.
   Bench: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna
   Case Title: Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise Vadodara – I vs. M/s Jyoti Limited and Ors.
   Click here to read more
    
2. [Adani Power] The Supreme Court has upheld the order of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, New Delhi of granting carrying cost interest on compounding basis in favour of Adani Power (Mundra) Limited, due to "Change in Law" with a dispute with Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd.
   Bench: CJI Ramana with Justices Murari and Kohli
   Case Title: UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND ANOTHER vs. ADANI POWER (MUNDRA) LIMITED AND ANOTHER
   Click here to read more
    
3. [IBC overrides Customs Act] The Supreme Court has held that in case of any conflict, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code will override the Customs Act. Former CJI Justice Ramana led bench observed that "The IBC would prevail over the Customs Act, to the extent that once moratorium is imposed in terms of Sections 14 or 33(5) of the IBC as the case may be, the respondent authority only has a limited jurisdiction to assess/determine the quantum of customs duty and other levies. The respondent authority does not have the power to initiate recovery of dues by means of sale/confiscation, as provided under the Customs Act."
   Bench: CJI Ramana with Justices JK Maheshwari and Hima Kohli
   Case Title: SUNDARESH BHATT, LIQUIDATOR OF ABG SHIPYARD vs. CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
   Click here to read more
    
4. [Unmarried Partnerships] The Supreme Court recently observed that familial relationships may take the form of domestic, unmarried partnerships or queer relationships. Court has further observed the dominant understanding of the concept of a "family," both in law and in society, is that it consists of a single, unchanging unit consisting of a mother and father (who remain constant over time) and their children.
   Bench: Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice AS Bopanna
   Case Title: Deepika Singh vs. Central Administrative Tribunal and Others
   Click here to read more
    
5. [Iron Ore Mining] The Supreme Court recently ordered that the ceiling limit of iron ore mining may be raised from 28 MMT to 35 MMT for District Bellary, and from 7 MMT to 15 MMT for Chitradurga and Tumkur Districts collectively in the state of Karnataka. While adopting a cautious approach, keeping in view the concerns raised and to ensure that any changes in the situation with respect to the mining activity in the State of Karnataka is brought about gradually, the top court ordered such a slight increase in the ceiling limit.
   Bench: CJI Justice Ramana and Justices CT Ravikumar and Hima Kohli
   Case Title: SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA AND ORS. vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS
   Click here to read more
    
6. [Freebies] While the Supreme Court referred the case concerning the issue of freebies during elections to a three-judge bench, it also noted that freebies may create a situation wherein the state government cannot provide basic amenities due to lack of funds and the state is pushed towards imminent bankruptcy. "In the same breath, we should remember that such freebies are extended utilizing taxpayers money only for increasing the popularity of the party and electoral prospects", a former CJI Justice Ramana led bench added.
   Bench: CJI Justice Ramana and Justices CT Ravikumar and Hima Kohli
   Case Title: ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR
   Click here to read more
    
7. [MACP Scheme] The Supreme Court has held that the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP Scheme) is applicable and to be implemented with effect from 1st September 2008, and not from 1st January 2006, the date from which the Central Civil Service (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 were enforced. A division bench has further held that under the Scheme, the entitlement is to financial upgradation equivalent to the immediate next grade pay in the hierarchy of the pay bands as stated in Section 1, Part A of the First Schedule to the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008.
   ​​​​​​​Bench: Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Bela Trivedi
   Case Title: UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS vs. EX. HC/GD VIRENDER SINGH
   ​​​​​​​Click here to read more
    
8. [Compassionate Appointment] The Supreme Court has held that rules which provide for financial criteria for appointment on compassionate grounds are valid and lawful rules which have to be construed strictly. Otherwise, the quota reserved for compassionate appointments would be filled up excluding others who might be in greater and/or far more acute financial distress, a division bench has added.
   ​​​​​​​Bench: Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice V Ramasubramaniam
   Case Title: Central Bank of India vs. Nitin
   ​​​​​​​Click here to read more