The Indian government has issued a new circular defining ‘proof of origin’ for imported goods, aiming to simplify trade processes and curb misuse of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs).

According to the circular of the Department of Revenue, proof of origin means a certificate or declaration issued in accordance with a trade agreement certifying that the goods fulfil the country of origin criteria.

The move aims to enhance transparency and ensure hassle-free customs clearance.

Industry bodies, like the Apparel Export Promotion Council (AEPC), have welcomed the change, calling it a step towards reducing uncertainty and preventing fraud in trade documentation.

The Supreme Court held that an arbitral award cannot be enforced if the claim was not part of an approved insolvency resolution plan. 

The court held that once the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) approves a resolution plan, all claims not incorporated within it are extinguished and cannot be pursued later.

The bench observed that allowing such claims would undermine the finality and certainty of the insolvency process.

Consequently, the Court set aside the execution of an arbitral award passed by a Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Facilitation Council after the resolution plan's approval. (Electrosteel Steels Ltd. v. Ispat Carrier Pvt. Ltd)

The Competition Commission of India has approved Google’s ₹20.24 crore settlement in an antitrust case related to the Android TV ecosystem.

The case involved allegations that Google imposed restrictive agreements on Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), including mandatory bundling of its apps and limiting alternative Android forks, violating Sections 3(4) and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.

After an investigation confirmed abuse of dominance, Google filed a settlement under the 2024 Settlement Regulations, agreeing to unbundle Play Store licensing and ease anti-fragmentation clauses.

The CCI accepted the proposal, setting a significant precedent for resolving digital competition cases through settlements.

Shivinder Mohan Singh, former promoter of Fortis Healthcare and Religare Enterprises, has filed for personal insolvency before NCLT Delhi, under Section 94 of the IBC, which permits individuals unable to repay debts to seek a structured resolution.

In his plea, Singh stated that his liabilities now far exceed his assets, many of which have been attached or devalued due to ongoing litigation, including the ₹3,500 crore arbitral award granted by a Singapore Tribunal in favor of Daiichi Sankyo, which found the SM Singh brothers liable for fraudulent misrepresentation in the 2008 Ranbaxy Deal.

The matter is scheduled for further hearing on May 20. 

SEBI issued an interim order restraining Anmol Singh Jaggi and Puneet Singh Jaggi, promoters of Gensol Engineering Ltd. and co-founders of BluSmart, from accessing the securities market and from acting as directors or key managerial personnel in any listed company.

SEBI's investigation revealed that ₹262 crore from loans intended for procuring 6,400 electric vehicles for BluSmart were diverted for personal expenses, including a ₹43 crore luxury apartment and a ₹26 lakh golf set. Only 4,704 EVs were reportedly acquired.

SEBI flagged serious financial irregularities and directed a forensic audit to examine the alleged misappropriation of corporate funds.

Following the order, BluSmart suspended operations in major cities and is reportedly considering transitioning to a fleet partnership model with Uber.

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has imposed penalties on UFO Moviez India Limited (₹1.04 crore), its subsidiary Scrabble Digital Limited, and Qube Cinema Technologies Private Limited (₹1.66 crore) for violating the  Competition Act, 2002.

These companies are significant players in the supply of digital cinema on lease/rent to Cinema Theatre Owners (CTOs). 

The CCI found that the companies entered into lease agreements with CTOs that imposed restrictions on the supply of content from parties other than their own companies.

These clauses were deemed anti-competitive, as they hindered other post-production service providers from entering the market, reducing fair competition.

The parties were directed to cease such practices. 

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed its first chargesheet against Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in the National Herald case.

The ED accuses Gandhis of orchestrating a criminal conspiracy to acquire assets worth ₹2,000 crore from Associated Journals Ltd (AJL) for just ₹50 lakh through their company, Young Indian, in which they hold a 76% stake. 

Other accused include Congress leaders Sam Pitroda and Suman Dubey. The court has scheduled the next hearing for April 25, 2025, to consider the chargesheet.

The Congress party has called the move politically motivated, calling it a state-sponsored crime.

The Karnataka High Court set aside the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)'s order directing Aakash Institute to maintain the status quo on its shareholding.

The Court held that NCLT passed the order without granting a proper hearing to Aakash Institute and Manipal Systems and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

The case relates to a shareholder dispute, where Singapore Topco and others opposed changes in Aakash’s Articles of Association, fearing dilution of their shareholding.

While setting aside the earlier order, the High Court directed Aakash not to reduce or dilute Byju’s shareholding until the NCLT reconsiders the case. 

The Supreme Court held that SEBI cannot pass more than one final order on the same issue or dispute.

In 2014, SEBI passed an order against Vital Communications Ltd for regulatory violations. This order became final as it was not appealed. However, in 2018, SEBI issued a fresh order directing the company to repay unlawful gains.

The company challenged it, citing the principle of res judicata.

The Securities Appellate Tribunal sided with the company, and the Supreme Court upheld this view, stating that once an order attains finality, SEBI cannot reopen the same matter and issue another order.

The Delhi Court directed police to register an FIR against a finance company for forging the signature of the dead person, namely, late Banwari Lal Saboo, to transfer the company's equity shares.

The company fabricated around 69 fake shareholders to meet SEBI's minimum shareholder requirement and maintain its NBFC license with the Reserve Bank of India.

The accused allegedly acted in a criminal conspiracy to unlawfully acquire shares and transfer them to associates and family members.

The company also fabricated letters and communications to falsely claim ownership of Saboo's original share certificate and ordered further investigation. 

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has reduced the Competition Commission of India's (CCI) penalty on Google from ₹936.44 crore to ₹216.69 crore in the Play Store policy case.

While upholding parts of the CCI's 2022 findings, the tribunal agreed that Google abused its dominant position by mandating its payment system for in-app purchases.

However, it noted that Google did not deny market access to other payment processors, as less than 1% of Play Store transactions occurred through Google's billing system.

Consequently, the penalty was reduced, and Google has been directed to pay the revised amount within 30 days.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has fined Basant Maheshwari Wealth Advisers LLP ₹4 lakh for violating fee regulations and posting misleading YouTube video titles. 

The firm wrongly charged 32 clients under both fixed fee and asset-based models, violating SEBI (Investment Advisers) Regulations, 2013, which required investment advisers to charge fees under only one mode per client annually.

SEBI also found that the firm’s YouTube videos had exaggerated captions and promoted Smallcase investments through links, making them advertisements.

SEBI ruled that financial videos promoting products are ads and must follow advertising norms. The firm must pay the fine within 45 days to avoid further penalties.

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has ordered status quo on the shareholding of Aakash Education Services Limited after a plea by Byju’s Resolution Professional. 

The dispute arose over Aakash’s attempt to amend its Articles of Association (AoA), which was opposed by Singapore Topco (a shareholder in Aakash) and Glas Trust (Bjyu's lender) due to concerns over the potential dilution of their stakes.

Senior Advocate Ravi Kadam, representing Byju’s, argued that the ₹2,000 crore investment was at risk. NCLT maintained the status quo while related appeals remain pending before NCLAT Chennai.

The tribunal has listed the case for April 30.