Online Law Solutions

Visit our website: www.onlinelawsolutions.com Subscribe our updates on tax/law: Click Here Germany’s Top Court has ruled that Facebook’s Friend Finder feature is illegal.  According to the Press release, The Federal Court of Justice upheld the concurrent findings of the courts below which had held that this feature constitutes advertising harassment. In 2010, Federation of German Consumer Organizations had complained that Facebook breached German consumer protection law by sending e-mails to consumers without their consent. The court allowed their complain which was also upheld in appeal. On Appeal to Top Court, it held that Facebook is obliged to disable the function in Germany. The function is an intrusive form of marketing on behalf of Facebook using data imported by the user, rather than a private message from the user to one of his email contacts, the court said. Facebook’s Friend finder feature allows Facebook users to give permission to search their co

Visit our website: www.onlinelawsolutions.com Subscribe our updates on tax/law: Click Here Supreme Court has observed that the terms of the contract, especially Arbitration agreements will have to be understood in the way the parties wanted and intended them to be. Apex Court Bench comprising of Justices Anil R. Dave, Kurian Joseph and Amitava Roy made this observation in Bharat Aluminium Company vs. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc. In Bharat Aluminium Company v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc., the Apex Court had held that Part I of the Arbitration Act is applicable only to all the arbitrations which take place within the territory of India”, overruling a three-Judge Bench decision in Bhatia International v. Bulk Trading S.A.. Exercising its the power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the Constitution Bench however, held that the law declared by it would only operate prospectively and the present case is guided by principles laid down

Visit our website: www.onlinelawsolutions.com Subscribe our updates on tax/law: Click Here The Supreme Court on Friday, in Union of India vs. Saleena, has set aside a Kerala High Court order which had granted the writ of habeas corpus directing the detenu who was detained under COFEPOSA Act to be set at liberty. The Apex Court Bench comprising of Justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C. Pant, however said that detaining authority should re-examine the matter keeping in view the principle stated in Sunil Fulchand Shah case and Chandrakant Baddi case within two months. Context The Division Bench of Kerala High Court had ordered release of Detenu on two grounds viz. the order rejecting the representation made by the Detenu was conveyed by under Secretary and not the competent authority the decision of the competent authority was not communicated and that it was not properly considered which violated his fundamental right under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of In

Visit our website: www.onlinelawsolutions.com Subscribe our updates on tax/law: Click Here Supreme Court on Friday, has held that State would not be estopped from altering/modifying the benefit of concessional tariff. Three Judge Bench of Apex Court comprising of Justices Ranjan Gogoi, Arun Mishra and Prafulla C. Pant made this observation in M/s. Kothari Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board.   The Appeal was against the Order of High Court which had dismissed the plea of company that the State had promised concessional tariff for a period of five years starting from the date of commencement of commercial production and it could not have been revisited by any contrary action. The Court referring to its decision in Shree Sidhbali Steels Limited vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors said that there can be no estoppel against the statute. The Court answering the reference before it, holding that the principle of promissory estoppel would hav

Visit our website: www.onlinelawsolutions.com Subscribe our updates on tax/law: Click Here The Apex Court on Friday stayed the criminal proceedings pending before an Andhra Pradesh court against ODI captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni in a case lodged against him for allegedly portraying himself as Lord Vishnu in an advertisement. Dhoni is currently touring in Australia in a five ODI and three T20 series against the hosts from January 12th to January 31st. A bench led by Justice Dipak Misra issued a notice to complainant Yerraguntla Shyam Sundar, who had asked for invocation of penal charges against Dhoni for allegedly hurting religious sentiments. The court also issued a notice on transfer of the criminal case from the court in Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh, to Bengaluru in Karnataka, where a similar case is pending. It will hear the case after eight weeks. Dhoni’s troubles relating to the matter dates back to 2013 when a case was registered by Choori Khan, Additional Ch

Visit our website: www.onlinelawsolutions.com Subscribe our updates on tax/law: Click Here GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND TAXES (POLICY BRANCH) VYAPAR BHAWAN, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110 002 No. 3(378)/Policy/VAT/2013/1389-94 Dated : 29-01-2016 CIRCULAR NO. 37 OF 2015-16 Sub: Expeditious disposal of refund cases of amount upto  10,000 A considerable number of refund cases are lying pending with department and many representations are being received in this regard.   In order to streamline the disposal of refund cases, at the first stage, it has been decided that all refunds pending upto the tax period ending  31 st  March, 2015 and having amount upto ₹ 10,000 in a tax period, would be processed expeditiously. In continuation to instructions already issued on the subject, these refund  cases should be processed as follows, by dispensing the requirement of any notice or personal appearance:- The claima

Visit our website: www.onlinelawsolutions.com Subscribe our updates on tax/law: Click Here GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Ministry of Corporate Affairs NOTICE INVITING COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT RULES W.R.T. NCLT RELATED PROVISIONS UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 Dated the 28th January, 2016 283 Sections of the Companies Act, 2013 have already been commenced. Remaining sections related to functioning of NCLT/NCLAT and certain other authorities are yet to be notified. In view of the Supreme Court order dated 14  th  May, 2015, the process for constitution of NCLT/NCLAT has been undertaken and these bodies are likely to be set up shortly. 2. The Ministry had set-up a Committee on 17th July, 2015 to examine the draft Rules w.r.t procedure to be followed NCLT/NCLAT. The said Committee has since made recommendations on draft rules w.r.t. following matters:- (i) Rules on Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamation; (ii) Rules on Prevention of Oppression and Mismana

Visit our website: www.onlinelawsolutions.com Subscribe our updates on tax/law: Click Here Frequently Asked Questions-    January 21, 2016 SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015 Disclaimer:   Based on queries,’ comments received from market participants, these FAQs have   been prepared to provide guidance on the provisions of   SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure   Requirements) Regulations, 2015   (“the Regulations”, “Listing Regulations”, “LR”) and circulars   issued there under. For full particulars of laws governing continuous disclosure requirements,   please refer to the Acts,’Regulations,’Guidelines,’Circulars etc. appearing under the Legal Framework Section of SEBI website i.e.,   www.sebi.gov.in   and the websites of respective recognized stock exchanges. A. Definitions Q1. Regulation 2(1)(b) of LR defines an ‘associate company’ to mean any entity which is an associate under the Companies Act, 2013 or u