What did the Supreme Court hold on Tiger Global?

What did the Supreme Court hold on Tiger Global?

On 15 January 2026, the Supreme Court denied tax exemption to Tiger Global on a 2018 transaction amounting to 14,500 crore rupees. In this video we break down crucial facts of the case and key holdings of the Court. The complete analysis is now available on our website, but if you want timely updates on the Supreme Court, make sure to sign up for our weekly newsletter!

Supreme Court's approach to national symbolism

In this episode of SCO explains, we examine how the Court has drawn a principled line between protecting symbols from genuine insult and resisting the attempts to impose symbolic conformity.

Supreme Court on Deportation of Rohingya Refugees

On 2 December, the Supreme Court heard a habeas corpus petition alleging the disappearance of a family of 5 Rohingya persons. The petition challenged the deportation on grounds of procedure, not as a matter of sovereign policy.During the hearing, CJI Surya Kant observed that India cannot lay a red carpet for intruders and that we ought to focus on the poor among Indian citizens who lack certain privileges. This prompted a public letter. In this video, we summarise the events that followed.

Limits on Oral Arguments and Written Submissions

The Supreme Court recently released a new Standard Operating Procedure that limits the length of written submissions and requires counsel to specify time required for oral arguments. In this video we draw from last week’s newsletter to explain what this procedure entails and why it’s likely to be opposed by arguing counsel.

Progression of Judges in the District Judiciary | Judgement

We break down the Supreme Court's judgment in All India Judges Association v. Union of India. Delivered on 19 November by former CJI B.R. Gavai, the Court rejected all proposals for reservation . The Bench described the plea as driven more by “heartburn” than an enforceable legal right, noting that the material on record did not show any consistent imbalance or disadvantage to civil judges that could justify creating a separate class. It also noted the need for a uniform national model for determining seniority in higher judicial services, directing the adoption of a four-point annual roster for assigning seniority to all recruits within a year.