The Ministry of Finance (Department of Economic Affairs) on 12 June 2026, notified the Foreign Exchange Management (Non-Debt Instruments) (Third Amendment) Rules, 2026 (‘Amendment Rules’), amending the Foreign Exchange Management (Non-Debt Instruments) Rules, 2019 (‘NDI Rules’). The Amendment Rules constitute the third amendment in the FEMA liberalisation cycle for the year 2026, following the first and second amendments, which respectively relaxed restrictions on investments from countries sharing a land border with India and liberalised foreign investment in the insurance sector opening the sector up till 100% under automatic route. The third amendment is yet another attempt to widen the gate for the Indian economy. For years, access to India's listed securities market was reserved specially for a defined class amongst which are foreign portfolio investors (FPIs) and non-resident Indians (NRIs) and overseas citizens of India (OCIs), this time the liberalisation is into the Indian capital markets.
The 2026 Steel import Regulation of the European Union (EU) (‘2026 Regulation’),[1] which came into force on 1 July 2026, is not simply a continuation of earlier Steel Safeguard measures[2] applicable since 2018, but it indicates a decisive shift in the EU’s approach to regulate its steel imports in the coming years. With lowering of tariff-rate quotas (TRQs), higher out-of-quota duties and proposal for stricter origin requirements, the 2026 Regulation goes beyond the WTO’s temporary safeguard regime to a more permanent industrial policy governing steel imports into the EU. In particular, the 2026 Regulation reduces the EU's tariff-free steel quota by ~47%, doubles the out-of-quota duty from 25% to 50%, and introduces a new ‘melt and pour’ traceability requirement.
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.
The present article deals with a noteworthy decision of the Indian Patents Office (‘IPO’) on the pre-grant opposition under Section 25(1) of the Patents Act, 1970 (‘Patents Act’). The said order was issued pursuant to the Delhi High Court (‘High Court’) remanding the matter to the Assistant Controller of Patents & Design (‘Controller’).
Recently, the Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology (‘MEITY’) released a draft amendment (‘Draft Amendment’) to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (‘Guidelines’) for public consultations. The Draft Amendment proposes to bring about certain changes to the grievance redressal mechanism, timelines for responding to grievances and proposes constitution...
In November 2019, the Government of India (‘GOI’) surprised the international trading community by withdrawing from the negotiations for the Regional Comprehensive and Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP), which it had been part of for several years.
This article concerns Section 50 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘CGST Act’). Much has been said and done about whether interest is liable to be paid on the gross tax liability in case of delayed payment of taxes.
Securities Market Regulator, SEBI, on 5 May 2021, made it mandatory for the top 1,000 listed entities (by market capitalization calculated as on the 31st day of March of every financial year) to provide annually a Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report (BRSR) from the financial year 2022-23.
A contentious issue that has seen much litigation in the recent past is regarding the claim of expenditure under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘IT Act’) incurred by pharmaceutical companies on gifting of freebies to doctors.
On 14 February 2022, the Review Board of the United States Copyright Office (‘Board’) opined on the registrability of works generated by Artificial Intelligence (‘AI’), a topic which has been deliberated by scholars and professionals in the field of intellectual property law since the advent of autonomous technology.
The article analyses a recent decision of the Delhi High Court wherein the Court refused to grant the prayer seeking issuance of an omnibus order restraining the Defendants from offering domain names containing the word ‘SNAPDEAL’. Yet, the Court held that the Defendants will not be granted the ‘safe harbour’ protection under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 if they continue to provide alternate domain names, for commercial profits, which infringe the registered trademarks.
The CERT-IN has released a set of Directions dated April 28, 2022 under the Information Technology Act (“Directions”) which relate to reporting of cyber security incidents and adopting additional measures towards protection of the IT and internet ecosystem in India. The article discusses the directions, enhanced obligations and new obligations introduced under the Directions for virtual private networks, virtual private servers and virtual asset providers…
Goldman Sachs backed Renew Power - one of India’s largest renewable energy companies, finally announced overseas listing through SPAC after long drawn discussions on raising funds through asset sale or listing through an IPO in India.
Particular Market Situation is a situation existing in the market of a product in the exporting country which is ‘particular’ or ‘distinct’ to the product in a manner that it can potentially distort its domestic selling prices and render them unfit for comparison with the export prices. Observing that the law is silent regarding the appropriate approach to determine the existence of a PMS, the article discusses some recent cases wherein the Indian investigating authority undertook a PMS analysis
The article analyses decision of the Delhi High Court which has held that once the Plaintiff has shown that the use by the Defendants is of the exact word i.e., the registered trademark of the plaintiff, and that the goods or services are identical, the Court will necessarily presume that confusion would arise in the minds of the public or consumers as to the origin of the goods or services and accordingly, an interim injunction would have to be issued. The authors state that even though...
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.
