Real judgements, distilled
Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1094
An older qualification must still satisfy the eligibility rules governing the appointment sought. Here, the certificate's early date did not secure reinstatement, and rejection of eligibility should not be confused with a conclusive finding that the certificate was forged.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1095
A party benefiting from a conditional stay must meet its deposit requirement or face enforcement. The additional ₹15 crore deposit secures the pending dispute; it does not settle the land's final compensation or amount to an immediate payment to the landowners.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1093
An alleged attempt to kill does not become a lesser offence simply because the victim avoided a fatal injury. Restoring this charge means the accusation must be tried; it does not establish that the accused is guilty.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1090
For the assessment in this case, assistance reducing ordinary manufacturing costs was taxable even though the government wanted to encourage industry. The purpose and actual operation of the particular subsidy mattered more than its general development label.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1091
Proof that someone caused a serious injury does not by itself prove the additional ingredients of robbery. A court can substitute a lesser offence supported by the evidence; the sentencing reduction here depended on Appa's particular circumstances.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1092
Someone challenging an election must ensure that the personal-presentation requirement is met and can be proved. Merely entering the court building does not establish compliance, and a filing defect can end the challenge before the election allegations are examined.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1088
An employee who retires on 30 June may be entitled to the increment that falls due on 1 July after completing a year of service. Authorities that delay paying the amounts due must pay interest after the deadline set by the court.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1089
Recruitment must follow the qualifications stated in the advertisement and the governing Recruitment Rules. A court will not override a merit-based eligibility decision made under those rules merely because the candidate concerned was higher in the written test.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8797
A person who occupied property only because of employment has no independent right to remain once the employment and decree end. Even when a petition fails, courts can make practical arrangements to let a person recover personal belongings.
14543 more judgements for members
You're seeing the newest cases. Log in — it's free — to keep scrolling, search by name or judge, and filter by court or legal area.
Log in to see moreThe appellant, a motor-vehicle dealer, raised tax invoices on customers at the manufacturer-mandated uniform price, but later issued credit notes granting discounts to stay competitive, so it actually received and recorded only the net, discounted amount in its books and tax returns. The Karnataka tax authorities disallowed this deduction under Rule 3(2)(c) of the Karnataka VAT Rules, 2005 (read with Section 30 of the Act), insisting the discount had to be shown in the original tax invoice/bill of sale itself to count toward reducing taxable turnover: a view the Karnataka High Court upheld. The dealer appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that trade discounts genuinely granted and recorded afterward in the books of account should still be deductible.
The Supreme Court held that insisting a trade discount be quantified and shown in the tax invoice at the very moment of the original sale, before it could even be known or finalized, would demand the impossible and produce an absurd, unrealistic result contrary to legislative intent. The Court held that the first proviso to Rule 3(2)(c) must be "read down" so that the requirement of reflecting the discount in the invoice/bill of sale applies to the transaction resulting in the final sale price, not only to the original sale figure before discount. However, the Court made clear this is not a blank cheque: any such discount must be proved through contemporaneous business records, and the final, discounted sale price must mandatorily be reflected in the dealer's accounts as required by Rule 3(2)(c). On this reading, the High Court's contrary, more rigid interpretation was rejected, and the appeals were allowed with no order as to costs.
Tax rules on deductions should be interpreted practically rather than literally where a literal reading would make compliance impossible: genuine post-sale discounts can still reduce taxable turnover, but only if they are properly documented and reflected in the business's own books of account.
