Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The plaintiff contended that the impugned platforms contained various features, such as the audio extraction feature, which are beyond the limited role of an intermediary specified under Section 79 (2)(a) of the IT Act, thereby disentitling the defendant from the 'safe-harbour' protection guaranteed to intermediaries under the IT Act.
On 16-9-2022 the CBDT has issued revised guidelines for compounding of offence under the Income-Tax Act, 1961 to simplify and
The Kerala journalist was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act on his way to Hathras, Uttar Pradesh to report on the alleged gang-rape of a Dalit woman, who later died in the Hospital.
Infringers cannot be permitted to seek shelter under Telegram’s policies merely on the ground that its physical server is in Singapore. If the protection of copyright is not evolved as per the changing times, it would have a chilling effect on the progressive initiatives taken by educators in sharing their materials and ensuring accessibility.
by Kartik Sharma†
Delhi High Court: In a case where FIR was registered by Managing Director of Sanash Impex Pvt. Ltd. (‘respondent’) against Flipkart (‘petitioner’)
The Central Board of Direct Taxes has notified Income-tax (26th Amendment) Rules, 2022 to amend Income-tax Rules, 1962. The amendment
Allahabad High Court: Krishan Pahal, J. dismissed the bail application of Siddique Kappan, the journalist who was arrested along with three others
Orissa High Court: A Division Bench of S. Muralidhar CJ and R. K. Pattanaik J. dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee
On September 17, 2021, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued a notification that no deduction of tax shall be
“The internet never sleeps;and the internet never forgets.”
by Achal Gupta†
Supreme Court: A Division Bench comprising of AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. has held that the contents of a memory card
Madras High Court: A Division Judge Bench comprising of Indira Banerjee, CJ. and M. Sundar, J., allowed a writ appeal filed against