The article discusses the recent circular which is issued by International Finance Services Centres Authority (‘IFSCA’) for imposing an obligation on Authorised FMEs, registered FMEs (Non-Retail) and Registered FMEs (Retail) to maintain a website or a webpage dedicated to their fund management activities in the IFSC.
The article discusses the conceptual foundations of the force of attraction rule, traces its judicial evolution in India, and evaluates the relevance of the doctrine in an era increasingly shaped by source-based taxation and digital nexus rules.
The notification of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 (‘2026 Scheme’) with effect from 1 July 2026, was anticipated to settle and provide clarity on the regulatory framework governing international workers under the Code on Social Security, 2020. However, it has done the opposite in one respect. The 2026 Scheme retains a dedicated framework for international workers and carries forward the substance of the erstwhile Paragraph 83 of the EPF Scheme, 1952 (‘1952 Scheme’) and Paragraph 43A of the EPS, 1995.
The article discusses the United Kingdom’s transition review of anti-dumping and countervailing duty measures on electric bicycles from China, where the UK Trade Remedies Authority concluded that continuation of measures on all e-bikes failed the Economic Interest Test. The article examines how the TRA collected and used economic information, how partial-equilibrium modelling was applied to assess different outcomes, and how the TRA’s economic assessment operated alongside the Secretary of State’s decision-making power. It also considers what this approach may offer for the examination of economic interest in Indian trade remedy investigations. According to the authors, it is important for Indian authorities to integrate a more nuanced public or user interest assessment into their final findings, particularly in sectors critical for the economy.
Various State Benches of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘GSTAT’) have recently become operational, and questions relating to jurisdiction between the Principal Bench and the State Benches have begun to arise in practice. While Section 109 of the CGST Act specifies certain categories of cases to be dealt with exclusively by the Principal Bench, early orders of the Principal Bench indicate that jurisdictional issues are not always straightforward.
With the Sustainable Harnessing and Advancement of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India Act, 2025[1] (‘SHANTI Act’) having come into effect on 21 December 2025, India has, to some extent, opened the gates to patenting of innovation in the nuclear energy sector. The SHANTI Act repeals the Atomic Energy Act of 1962 (‘AEA’). This change in nuclear energy governance framework supports India’s long-term objective of achieving nuclear energy capacity of 100 gigawatt by 2047, which at present stands at 8.78 gigawatts[2].
In the evolving landscape of modern commerce where visual appeal often dictates consumer choice, the significance of packaging has transcended its conventional role as a mere container of goods. In the realm of Intellectual Property Law, trade dress today functions as a silent yet powerful source identifier, one that shapes consumer perception, builds brand loyalty, and distinguishes products in crowded marketplaces.
The judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 27 May 2026, in Amara Raja Energy and Mobility Limited v. Exide Industries Limited[1] stands as a defining precedent in the field of trade dress protection. This dispute arose in the Calcutta High Court, where the Single Judge as well as the Division Bench granted Exide an interim injunction, holding that its long-standing use of a distinctive combination of colours and design elements had acquired secondary meaning and was protectable as trade dress.
n today’s world, the terms ‘organic’, ‘natural’, ‘eco-friendly’ and their friends are tossed around like they are the new currency, the buzzwords that uplift the market value, the leverage to bypass the regular route or the attribute that stands out. Looks like it is lost on us that these should not be the outlier attributes but the normal, the regular, the way things are supposed to be.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in Sanand Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. JCIT revisits two recurring fault lines in tax litigation—when an assessment can be reopened and how income must be characterized when commercial arrangements blur taxation principles. In doing so, the Court clarifies that the true test for reassessment is not whether basic facts/ underlying documents were merely disclosed, but whether their true implication was made known to the assessing authority
In today’s world with WTO mechanism and multilateralism under severe strain, countries are increasingly looking for bilateral and regional partnerships to enhance the market access for their products and services. In this quest, countries are entering into free trade agreements (‘FTAs’ or ‘agreements’), under which they grant duty concessions, often reducing tariffs to zero from their FTA partner countries.
The article discusses the Draft Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Second Amendment Rules, 2026, which is a step towards regulating digital intermediaries. According to the Team, the amendments propose a clear shift toward tighter, more centralized regulation of digital intermediaries, significantly raising compliance expectations and legal risk.
India is in the middle of a significant overhaul of its labour laws and at the heart of it is the Code on Social Security, 2020 (‘SS Code’) prescribing for statutory compliances for the welfare of employees.
The effectiveness of any statutory obligation to collect an amount, hinges entirely on the existence of express recovery provision in the case of default.
The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from advertising and soliciting work through communication in the public domain. This website is meant solely for the purpose of information and not for the purpose of advertising. Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan does not intend to solicit clients through this website. We do not take responsibility for decisions taken by the reader based solely on the information provided in the website. By clicking on 'ACCEPT', the visitor acknowledges that the information provided in the website (a) does not amount to advertising or solicitation and (b) is meant only for his/her understanding about our activities and who we are.
By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our Cookie Policy.