w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay v/s National Electrical Industries Ltd., Bombay


Company & Directors' Information:- INCOME INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U02411MP1989PTC005351

Company & Directors' Information:- NATIONAL CO LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51909WB1917PLC002781

Company & Directors' Information:- BOMBAY COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U99999MH1918PTC000144

Company & Directors' Information:- NATIONAL CORPORATION PVT LTD [Not available for efiling] CIN = U51909PB1942PTC000480

Company & Directors' Information:- K INDUSTRIES PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U99999KA1946PTC000938

Company & Directors' Information:- INDUSTRIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U00349KA1947PTC000501

Company & Directors' Information:- J INDUSTRIES PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101OR1960PTC000388

    Income-tax Ref. No. 63 of 1958

    Decided On, 30 June 1959

    At, High Court of Judicature at Bombay

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.T. DESAI

    For the Petitioner: G.N. Joshi, R.J. Joshi, Advocates. For the Respondent: R.J. Kolah, N.A. Palkhiwalla, Advocates.



Judgment Text

Shah, J.

1. The assessment years in this reference are 1952-53 and 1953-54. The assessee company had suffered a loss of Rs. 1,15,220, in the assessment year 1950-51 and this loss was carried forward to the next assessment year. The company was also unable fully to avail of the depreciation allowance in 1950-51 and 1951-52. The assessee was a newly established industrial undertaking and was entitled to exemption from payment of tax to the extent prescribed by S. 15-C of the Income-tax Act. In the year of account 1951-52 the assessee made a profit of Rs. 8,65,000 odd, but after making allowance for the unabsorbed depreciation of the previous years and also the losses carried forward from the previous years, there remained no taxable income and accordingly no demand for tax was made for the assessment year of 1952-53. In assessing the total income, the Income-tax Officer did not give the benefit of exemption from payment of tax under Section 15C of the Income-tax Act to the assessee. The Income-tax Officer deducted out of the net profits the unabsorbed loss of the previous years and the depreciation and when it was found that the total income of the assessment year 1952-53 was exhausted, the benefit of S. 15-C by providing exemption to the extent of tax on 6 per cent of the capital employed was not given. It is evident that if the benefit of exemption from payment of tax under S. 15-C was given to the assessee before loss carried forward from the previous year and the unabsorbed depreciation of the previous year were allowed out of the profits, full provision could not be made for the latter allowances in the year of assessment. But the assessee would have been permitted to carry forward the loss to the next assessment year and the unabsorbed depreciation could be treated as depreciation for the subsequent year. When, however, the assessee was not given the benefit of exemption under S. 15-C in the assessment year, the shortfall could not under the law be carried forward to the next assessment year.

2. The order passed by the Income-tax Officer was confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. In the view of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, in assessing the taxable income certain deductions under Section 24 (2) were allowable under the law because the assessee had suffered a loss in the previous year but the Income-tax Officer was bound in the first instance to allow to the assessee the benefit of exemption from payment of tax under Section 15C before setting off the loss carried forward from the previous year. The Tribunal accordingly set aside the order of the taxing authorities and directed the Income-tax Officer to give the benefit of exemption from payment of tax to the assessee under Section 15C before setting off the loss brought forward from the preceding year.

3. The Tribunal has at the instance of the Commissioner referred the following question :

'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the loss brought forward from the preceding year amounting to Rs. 1,15,220 should be set off against the profits of the year of account without allowing the assessee the benefit of Section 15C of the Income-tax Act?'

4. The question debated before us is as to the priority between the benefit of exemption from payment of lax under Section 15C and the set off in respect of loss of previous year under Section 24 (2), when the set off does not leave adequate taxable income to make the exemption under Section 15C from payment of tax real. Evidently, under the scheme of the Income-tax Act, assessable income of the assessee has to be computed by aggregating the various heads of taxable income subject to permissible deductions and thereafter by Section 24 the losses suffered whether in the year of account or carried forward from the previous year to the permissible extent have to be deducted in assessing the total income and it is only after the total income is ascertained and tax is computed thereon that the benefit is to be allowed to the assessee by exempting him from payment of tax on such profits or gains derived from the industrial undertaking as do not exceed 6 per cent on the capital employed in the undertaking. In other words, according to the scheme envisaged by the Act, the total income can be ascertained after allowing from the income of the year of account the unabsorbed depreciation of the previous year as well as the permitted set off of losses of the current and previous years and it is only after the total income is computed and the liability to tax ascertained that the benefit of Section 15C can be provided to the assessee. The forms of return of income prescribed under Rule 19 framed under the Act, clearly indicate that the income accrued from various sources such as salaries, interest on securities, business, property and other sources has to be aggregated and on the income so aggregated, the tax has to be ascertained and against the tax so ascertained credit has to be given for the amounts exempted to the extent permissible under Sec. 15C as well as under Sections 15A and 15B. Apparently by enacting Section 15C the Legislature has not prescribed for exclusion of a percentage from the head of profits of a new industrial undertaking in the computation of total income but has merely provided a partial exemption from payment of tax by newly established undertakings and in the natural sequence of computation of tax, the amount of losses carried forward is liable to be deducted out of the income of the year of account and it is only after the quantum of tax is ascertained, exemption from payment to the prescribed extent will be given by the taxing authorities.

5. The contention of the assessee that by S. 15-C so much of the profits derived from the newly established undertaking to which the section applies as do not exceed 6 per cent per annum on the capital employed in the undertaking are to be excluded in the computation of total income and this exclusion is to be made irrespective of any set off which is permissible under Section 24(2), has in our judgment no force. It is true that in order to give a fillip to new industrial undertakings and to secure speedy industrialization, the legislature has provided for exemption from payment of tax on a percentage of the capital employed in the undertaking, but thereby the true nature of the exemption is not altered. The exemption is in terms from payment of tax and it is not an exclusion of income in the computation of total income. It is true that under proviso (b) to Section 24 (2) it is expressly enacted that where depreciation allowance under clause (b) of the proviso to clause (vi) of sub-section (2) of section 10 is to be carried forward, effect shall first be given to the provisions of Section 24 (2). If the profits or gains in respect of any business, profession or vocation are insufficient in the assessment year to permit full allowance for unabsorbed depreciation of the previous year under S. 10 (2) (vi) Proviso (b), the set off of losses for previous years permitted under Section 24 (2) is to be given in the first instance and the unabsorbed depreciation is to be treated as depreciation in the subsequent years. No similar provision is made giving priority to set off in respect of losses of the previous years over the exemption from payment of tax under S. 15-C. But proviso (b) to S. 10(2) (vi) was enacted to cover cases of competing rival claims for deduction from income in computing the taxable income. The exemption from payment of tax under S. 15-C and the privilege of carrying forward losses, are, however, not benefits of the same category and become allowable to the assessee at different stages of assessment. It is difficult then to visualise a competition between these two benefits. The absence of an express provision postponing the exemption from tax under S. 15-C to a set off for losses of previous years carried forward does not therefore justify the view that the scheme of computation of total income for purposes of assessment was intended to be reversed.

6. By sub-section (3) of S. 15-C profits or gains of an industrial undertaking to which that section applies have to be computed in accordance with the provisions of Section 10. Every industrial undertaking may, however, be regarded as a business and the computation of profits and gains has to be made even apart from sub-section (3) of Section 15C in accordance with the provisions of Section 10, and the necessity of incorporating that provision in S. 15-C may not be easily appreciated; but we are on that account unable to hold that it was intended by enacting that provision by implication to relegate the set off of loss to the exemption of tax under S. 15-C. There is no such express provision made, and we do not think that any implication of that nature is permissible. Nor does clause (5) of Section 15C which provides that nothing in the section shall affect the application of Section 23A in relation to profits or gains of an industrial undertaking to which the section applies affect the interpretation of the operative part of Section 15-C.

7. In our view, whereas Section 24 (2) deals with a permissible deduction from the totality of assessable inc

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

ome, Section 15-C provides only for an exemption from payment of tax; and if in computing the total income liable to tax and the rates at which the tax is payable set off of losses of the previous years is to be allowed, it would be difficult to hold that the set off will be postponed to the benefit of Section 15C. The Legislature undoubtedly intended to confer certain benefits upon industrial undertakings to which Section 15C applies but we will not on that account be justified in holding that, when the Legislature has not provided that the benefit of Section 15C is to be allowed as a deduction from income, deduction substantially of that nature should still be made on the assumption that an absence of an express provision dealing with priority implied that intention. 8. We reframe the question by substituting the word 'before' for the word 'without' and answer the question in the affirmative. 9. Assessee to pay the costs of the Commissioner. Answer in the affirmative.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

04-08-2020 Kaizen Organics Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-08-2020 GMR Hyderabad Vijayawada Expressways Pvt. Ltd. & Another Versus National Highways Authority of India & Another High Court of Delhi
31-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Rajesh Kumar Dy. Manager, New Delhi Versus Biking Food Products (P) Ltd., Telangana National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
28-07-2020 Dr. Uma Suresh Versus The Authorised Officer, The National Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
28-07-2020 NSL Sugars Limited, Rep. by its Assistant General Manager (Liason) H.V. Amarnath Versus State of Karnataka, Rep. by its Secretary (Sugar) Commerce & Industries Department, Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
27-07-2020 Punjab National Bank, Guwahati Versus Madhab Kumar Das & Another & Others High Court of Gauhati
24-07-2020 National Insurance Company Limited Through Its Duly Constituted Attorney Manager, New Delhi Versus M/s. D.D Spinners Pvt. Ltd., Panipat National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-07-2020 Aqua Pump Industries, Rep by its Managing Partner Ramaswamy Kumaravelu & Another Versus N. Raju, Trading as S.M.Agriculture & Electronics, Bangalore High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-07-2020 Director of Income Tax-II (International Taxation) New Delhi & Another Versus M/s. Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. Supreme Court of India
21-07-2020 Ex-Subedar Vinod Kumar Sharma Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through National Legal Vertical, New Delhi Versus M/s. Krishna Spico Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
16-07-2020 N.M. Chandrashekar Versus The State of Karnataka, by its Secretary Department of Commerce & Industries, Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
15-07-2020 Nikhil Singhvi Versus Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi & Another High Court of Delhi
14-07-2020 The Director General (Road Development) National Highways Authority of India Versus Aam Aadmi Lokmanch & Others Supreme Court of India
14-07-2020 M/s. Terracon Projects, Represented by its Proprietor S.V. Babu Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented by its Principal Secretary Department of Commerce & Industries, Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
09-07-2020 M/s. Durga Fabrication Works, Represented by its Proprietor, Prakash Ramu Rathod Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented By Its Secretary, Department of Industries & Commerce, Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
06-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus A. Badurinssa & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-06-2020 National Seeds Corporation Ltd. Jaipur & Others Versus Manju Devi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-06-2020 M/s. Goodwill Leather Art Rep By its Prop Md Quddus ALi Alias Md Quddus Ali Molla Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
19-06-2020 Vipin Kumar Choudhary Versus Makhan Lal Chaturvedi National University Of Journalism & Communication - Bhopal National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
19-06-2020 Ram Avtar Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
19-06-2020 M/s. Virgo Industries (Engineers) Pvt Ltd., Rep. By its Director Reethamma Joseph & Another Versus M/s. Venturetech Solutions Pvt Ltd., Rep. By its Director N. Mal Reddy High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-06-2020 M/s. Integrated Finance Company Limited rep. by its Legal Officer and duly constituted Attorney A. Hema Jothi Versus Garware Marine Industries Limited Registered Office at Chander Mukhi High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-06-2020 State Bank of India, Bombay Thru. Chairman & Others Versus S.B. Singh High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
18-06-2020 Rajendra Singh & Others Versus National Insurance Company Limited & Others Supreme Court of India
17-06-2020 S. Selvam Versus The Senior Manager – HRD Air India Limited, (Now known as National Aviation Company of India Limited), Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-06-2020 D.D. Industries Ltd., New Delhi Versus Jasmeet Walia & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
16-06-2020 Pia Singgh Versus National Law University Delhi High Court of Delhi
15-06-2020 Piara Ram Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Manager, Punjab National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
11-06-2020 Prakash Industries Limited. Versus Bengal Energy Limited. & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
09-06-2020 Rakesh Malhotra Versus Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
09-06-2020 Vadilal Maganlal Trevadia Versus Bombay Municipal Corporation & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
09-06-2020 State rep. by the Drugs Inspector, O/o. Director of Drugs Control, Tamil Nadu, Chennai Versus M/s. National Pharmaceuticals [A-3], A Division of Rider Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by Kamalchand Jain, Director & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-06-2020 Bhubaneshwar Expressways Pvt. Ltd. Versus National Highways Authority of India High Court of Delhi
01-06-2020 Aditya Birla Money Limited, Rep. By its Head – Legal & Compliance, L.R. Murali Krishnan Versus The National Stock Exchange of India Limited, Investors Services Cell, Kotturpuram & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-06-2020 Khaleed Pasha & Others Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by its Secretary Department of Commerce & Industries (MSME, Mines & Textile), Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
27-05-2020 Gautam Navlakha Versus National Investigation Agency & Another High Court of Delhi
26-05-2020 Dr. Divyesh J. Pathak & Others Versus National Board of Examinations & Another High Court of Delhi
26-05-2020 Tips Industries Ltd. Versus Entertainment Network (Kindia) Ltd. & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
26-05-2020 Guru Nanak Industries, Faridabad & Another Versus Amar Singh (Dead) Through Lrs. Supreme Court of India
20-05-2020 M/s. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited, Represented by its Authorised Signatory, Nilesh Mahendra Kumar Gandhi & Another Versus The Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (Check of Accounts) & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
15-05-2020 Mohet Hojai Versus National Investigation Agency Supreme Court of India
13-05-2020 Jayanta Sarkar Versus National Jute Board & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
12-05-2020 Spentex Industries Ltd Versus Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP High Court of Delhi
06-05-2020 Punjab National Bank & Others Versus Atmanand Singh & Others Supreme Court of India
30-04-2020 Natural Sugar and Allied Industries Limited & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary for Co-operation, Marketing & Textile Department, Mantralaya & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
27-04-2020 Dr. Devyesh J. Pathak & Others Versus National Board of Examination & Others High Court of Delhi
27-04-2020 Bihar State Electricity Board & Others Versus M/s. Iceberg Industries Ltd. & Others Supreme Court of India
27-04-2020 Commercial Taxes Officer Versus M/s. Bombay Machinery Store Supreme Court of India
24-04-2020 Union of India & Others Versus Exide Industries Limited & Another Supreme Court of India
22-04-2020 National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Versus S.A. Alimenta Supreme Court of India
15-04-2020 The Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
07-04-2020 (The State) The National Investigation Agency, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, Represented by the Superintendent of Police, Assam Versus Akhil Gogoi High Court of Gauhati
23-03-2020 The Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Limited, Sikkim Versus Bishal Chettri & Another High Court of Sikkim
20-03-2020 M/s. CJP Industries, Represented by its Managing Partner S. Julius Versus Amitha Bishnoi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-03-2020 West Bengal Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. & Others Versus M/s. Sona Promoters Pvt. Ltd. & Others Supreme Court of India
17-03-2020 S. Vaikundarajan Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep., by its Principal Secretary to Government, Industries (MMD.2) Department, Chennai Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
17-03-2020 A Marine Industries Munambam, Ernakulam, Represented by Its Proprietor, P.T. Francis & Others Versus UCO Bank, Represented by The Chief Manager, Ernakulam & Another High Court of Kerala
16-03-2020 Peps Industries Private Limited Versus Kurlon Limited High Court of Delhi
13-03-2020 The National Insurance Co. Ltd., Kolkata, through its Regional Manager Versus Marotrao & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
13-03-2020 The Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Suchandra Basak West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
12-03-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd., National Legal Vertical (Legal Cell), New Delhi Versus Biswadeb Koley & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
12-03-2020 The Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Subhash Mahanta West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
12-03-2020 M/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd., Puducherry Versus Rani & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-03-2020 Sai Electromech Industries, A Sole Proprietary Concern rep.by Its Proprietor Umangkumar Joshi Versus Sicagen India Limited, Rep.by its Authorised Signatory S. Mahadevan High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-03-2020 M/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd., Basheerbagh, Hyderabad through local branch at Khammam Versus F.R. Phillip High Court of for the State of Telangana
11-03-2020 Agrocel Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus United India Insurance Company Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Bombay
10-03-2020 National Company, Represented by its Managing Director, Dr. Arun A Raja Versus Joint Chief Controller of Explosives Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Petroleum & Explosives Safety Organization (PESO), (Formerly Department of Explosives), Egmore, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-03-2020 S. Nijam Ali @ Nijam Versus Union of India, Rep. by the Addl. Superintendent of Police, National Investigation Agency, Kochi Branch High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-03-2020 Pankaj Kumar Singh Versus National Thermal Power Corp Ltd. & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh
06-03-2020 Ballarpur Industries Limited & Another V/S The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Department of Forests, Mantralaya In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
06-03-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Rajasthan & Another Versus Bhawal Synthetics India Ltd., Rajasthan & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
06-03-2020 M/s. Connectwell Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India Through Ministry of Finance & Others Supreme Court of India
06-03-2020 Mumtaz & Others Versus The National Insurance Co. Ltd., & Another High Court of Karnataka
05-03-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus S. Chitirai Pandian & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-03-2020 UCO Bank Versus National Textile Corporation Limited & Another Supreme Court of India
05-03-2020 Electrosteel Steels Limited, Bokaro & Others Versus The State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Department of Industries, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi & Others High Court of Jharkhand
05-03-2020 Gunjan Kumar Versus Management of Circle Head Punjab National Bank, Darbhanga & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
04-03-2020 Picturehouse Media Ltd., Chennai Versus Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd. & Another SEBI Securities amp Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
04-03-2020 The National Council of Women in India, Tamil Nadu Branch, Represented by its President, Chennai Versus Arulmighu Kapaleeswarar Koil, Represented by its Joint Commissioner, Executive Officer, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-03-2020 M/s. Ramco Industries Ltd., Rajapalaym Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-03-2020 In The Matter of: Punjab National Bank, NOIDA Uttar Pradesh Versus State Bank of India Sam Brnach, New Delhi (Branch Code-04109), New Delhi & Others National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
03-03-2020 Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay through P.P. Dhawade V/S Sharda Sanghvi & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
02-03-2020 G.T.P. Transport Company, Swaranpuri, Salem & Another Versus National Insurance Company Ltd., Divisional Manager, Salem & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-03-2020 Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Represented by Regional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Bengaluru Versus Latha & Others High Court of Karnataka
28-02-2020 M/s. Techno Global Services Pvt. Ltd. & Another Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
28-02-2020 The State of Maharashtra (Through Anti Corruption Bureau) Greater Bombay Unit, Gr. Bombay) Versus Talimunisa Rais Ahmed High Court of Judicature at Bombay
28-02-2020 Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd Versus Prime Cable Network & Another High Court of Delhi
28-02-2020 Bank of India V/S M/s. Brindavan Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd Supreme Court of India
28-02-2020 Trans Asian Industries Exposition Pvt. Ltd. & Others Versus Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd & Another High Court of Delhi
27-02-2020 Taraknath College of Education Versus National Council For Teacher Education & Another High Court of Delhi
27-02-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Bhagwan Bhika Shirsath & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
26-02-2020 Punjab National Bank Versus M/s Vindhya Cereals Pvt. Ltd. National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
25-02-2020 Kamal Encon Industries Limited Through its Authorized Representative Versus Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission Through its Secretary World Trade Centre, Mumbai & Others Appellate Tribunal for Electricity Appellate Jurisdiction
25-02-2020 Eurotex Industries and Exports Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner of Labour-cum-Specified Authority & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
24-02-2020 Panch Tatva Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Versus GPT Steel Industries Ltd. (Through Resolution Professional) & Others National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
24-02-2020 S. Suresh Versus The Management Exide Industries Ltd., Madurai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
20-02-2020 Asian Food Industries Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
20-02-2020 M/s Century Rayon (A division of Century Textile & Industries Ltd.), Maharashtra V/S Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., Through its, Chief Engineer (Commercial), Maharashtra And Others Appellate Tribunal for Electricity Appellate Jurisdiction
19-02-2020 The National Textile Corporation Ltd. & Another Versus Modified voluntary Retirement Scheme of 2002 of Azam Jahi Mill Workers Association & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana