Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 24 – March 02, 2025

Nominal Index:

Rupchand Shende vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 72

Oxford University Press v. DCIT, Int. Tax Circle 3 (2)(2) & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 73

Systra MVA Consulting (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 74

Hanumant Naik vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 75

Vijay Shrinivasrao Kulkarni v. ITAT Pune Bench & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 76

Satish Poptlal Shah & Anr vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 77

Pooja Popalghat vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 78

Sameer Mohammad Yusuf Patel vs Panvel Municipal Corporation, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 79

Priyanka Bannerji vs State of Maharashtra, 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 80

Judgments/Final Orders:

If A Man's Intention While Making Promise To Marry Is To Deceive A Girl Into Sexual Relations, Her Consent Gets Vitiated: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Rupchand Shende vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 72

When the promise to marry is false and the intention of the maker at the time of making the promise itself was not to abide by it but to deceive her to convince her to engage in sexual relations, there is a 'misconception of fact' and the same 'vitiates' the girl's consent, the Bombay High Court held recently while upholding the rape conviction of a man, accused of raping a minor.

Change In Tax Rate In Future AYs Not Ground For Reassessment Without Fulfilling Jurisdictional Parameters U/S 148 Income Tax Act: Bombay HC

Case title: Oxford University Press v. DCIT, Int. Tax Circle 3 (2)(2) & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 73

The Bombay High Court has made it clear that merely because the tax rate which is applicable on an assessee changes in future assessment years (AYs), is not a ground to initiate reassessment action against it for previous AYs, unless the 'jurisdictional parameters' of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are fulfilled.

Discontinuing Contract Without Giving Reasons Arbitrary: Bombay HC Quashes MMRDA's Contract Termination Notice For Mumbai Metro Consultancy

Case title: Systra MVA Consulting (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 74

The Bombay High Court has set aside a notice issued by the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) that terminated a tender contract with Systra MVA Consulting (India) Pvt Ltd for the appointment of General Consultant for Mumbai Metro Line, ruling that the cancellation was arbitrary and unreasonable.

Can't Seek Defence Of Illiteracy To Perform Illegal Act: Bombay HC Rejects Man's Plea Seeking ₹5 Crore For Removal Of Illegal Structure

Case Title: Hanumant Naik vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 75

While observing that a person cannot be permitted to perform an illegal act in the garb of being "illiterate", the Bombay High Court on Tuesday (February 25) dismissed a man's plea who sought Rs 5 crore compensation from the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) for demolishing his "unauthorised" structure.

ITAT Cannot Perpetuate Ex-Parte Order: Bombay High Court Orders Tribunal To Grant Opportunity Of Hearing To Assessee Before Proceeding On Merits

Case title: Vijay Shrinivasrao Kulkarni v. ITAT Pune Bench & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 76

The Bombay High Court has disapproved of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing the appeal against an ex-parte order passed against a former employee of Pfizer Healthcare without providing him an opportunity of hearing. Stating that ITAT cannot “perpetuate” the ex-parte order, a division bench of Justices GS Kulkarni and Advait M. Sethna directed the Tribunal to hear the employee de novo, so far as his prayer for the grant of exemption under section 89 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is concerned.

'Speculative Litigation': Bombay High Court Imposes ₹2 Lakh Exemplary Costs For Ownership Claim On Land Acquired In 1947

Case title: Satish Poptlal Shah & Anr vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 77

The Bombay High Court imposed Rs. 2 lakh in exemplary costs on the petitioners for 'taking chances' with the court process by filing a petition claiming ownership of land acquired in 1947, offering no explanation for the 77-year delay and making contradictory pleadings and unverified averments.

'Natural Guardian' Under Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act Can Act As 'Manager' Of Joint Family Properties For Herself & Minors: Bombay High Court

Case Title: Pooja Popalghat vs State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 78

The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court recently held that a natural guardian being the eldest member of a Hindu joint family can exercise powers to deal with the rights of the minors in the joint family, keeping in mind the aspect of legal necessity and benefit of the minor.

Bombay High Court Slaps Rs 1 Lakh Costs On Man For Audio-Recording Court Proceedings On Mobile Phone

Case Title: Sameer Mohammad Yusuf Patel vs Panvel Municipal Corporation

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 79

In a recent order, the Bombay High Court (February 27) imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on a litigant who was found to be 'audio-recording' court proceedings on his mobile phone.

Marriage Under Special Marriage Act Not Illegal Only Because Either Spouse Did Not Live In The District Where Marriage Was Registered For 30 Days: Bombay HC

Case Title: Priyanka Bannerji vs State of Maharashtra 

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Bom) 80

A marriage duly certified under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 cannot be deemed illegal or void just because either of the spouses did not comply with section 5 of the Act, which mandates one of them to live in the district, where they register their marriage, for 30 days, the Bombay High Court held. A division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Advait Sethna said once a marriage certificate is issued by the Registrar of Marriages under the Special Marriage Act, it is conclusive evidence of the legality of the marriage until it is quashed by a court of law.

Other Orders/Observations:

Prima Facie Unimpressed: Bombay HC On Volkswagen's Argument That Importing Parts Of Car Should Be Considered Import Of Individual Units

While hearing Skoda Auto Volkswagen India's petition challenging a tax demand of USD 1.4 billion by Indian Customs authorities, the Bombay High Court orally expressed that it was prima facie not satisfied with Volkswagen's argument that importing several parts of car should be considered as importing 'individual units' of the car rather than a 'Completely Knocked Down' (CKD) unit, which is taxed at a higher rate.

Skoda-Volkswagen Case : Bombay High Court Asks Customs Dept To Explain How Show Cause Notice Isn't Time-Barred

In Skoda Auto Volkswagen India's petition challenging a tax demand of USD 1.4 billion by Indian Customs authorities, the Bombay High Court today asked the Customs Authority to file an affidavit explaining why the September 2024 show-cause notice issued to the company is not barred by limitation.

Man Aquitted In 26/11 Mumbai Terror Attacks Case Moves Bombay High Court Seeking 'Right To Livelihood', Judge Recuses From Hearing Plea

One of the accused in the 26/11 Mumbai Terror Attack case - Fahim Arshad Mohammad Yusuf Ansari, who was acquitted from the case on May 6, 2010, has moved the Bombay High Court seeking a 'Police Clearance Certificate' so that he can engage in some employment to earn his livelihood.

Bombay High Court 'Shocked' As Thane Court Stays Magistrate's Finding That Badlapur Encounter Was Fake

The Bombay High Court on Thursday expressed 'shock' over a Thane Sessions Court judge, who stayed the 'findings' of a Magistrate Enquiry, which concluded that there was 'substance' in the allegations made by the parents of the accused in the Badlapur Sexual Assault Case that their son was killed in a 'fake encounter.'

Bombay High Court Flags 'Cut Copy Paste' Orders Being Passed By Banks To Declare Fraud Accounts; Asks Anil Ambani To Approach RBI

The Bombay High Court on Friday asked industrialist Anil Ambani to approach the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to challenge the October 10, 2024 order passed by the Union Bank of India (UBI) by which it classified his loan account, related to Reliance Communications, as "fraudulent account." A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Dr Neela Gokhale noted that the banks were merely 'cut, copy and pasting' the opinion of the auditors and declaring accounts as fraudulent or defaulters, without applying their own minds and even without following the mandate in the latest Master Circular of the RBI.