Mangal Das son of late Shri Asandas Vs Amar Singh Son of Shri Moolchand Chauhan (Rajasthan High Court) The basic object of the Rent Control Act, 1950 is to save the harassment of tenant from unscrupulous landlords. However, such object of the Rent Control Act, 1950 may not be misconstrued to deprive the landlords of […]
Tvl. GK Digital Printing Vs Assistant Commissioner (Circle) (Madras High Court) GST registration cancelled as returns for continuous period of 6 months not filed. Petitioner directed to file all the pending returns (before and after cancellation of registration) and also pay all the pending taxes, interest, fee, fine, etc. Facts- The petitioner has filed the […]
ITO Vs Satyanarayan Nathulal Gandhi Chowk (ITAT Raipur) Held that the entire purchase amount of such bogus purchase cannot be added at best the addition limited to the extent of G. P. Rate on purchases at the same rate of the genuine purchase. Facts- A survey operation u/s 133A was conducted in the business premises of […]
S.D. Overseas Vs Joint Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi) Penalty u/s 114AA leviable in case of misdeclaration of the value of the imported goods as per the manufacturer’s price lists. Facts- The appellant had imported a consignment of Food Supplements through ICD, Tughlakabad and filed a Bill of Entry dated 04.01.2013 and the goods were […]
The appellant engaged in the manufacture of iron ore pellets. One of the raw materials required for the same is iron ore fines.
There was a demand from trade that an AD code should required to be registered only once in Customs System for filing documents across all the customs locations. To facilitate trade, the following changes have been made in the System in respect of AD Code registration
These Regulations may be called the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Inspection and Investigation) (Amendment) Regulations, 2022.
These Regulations may be called the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) (Amendment) Regulations, 2022.
Jotbir Singh Bhalla Vs Suncity Projects Pvt. Ltd. (NAA) Authority determines that the Respondent has profiteered an amount of Rs. 2,62,56,652/-. Therefore, given the above facts, the Authority under Rule 133(3)(a) of the CGST Rules orders that the Respondent shall reduce the price to be realized from the buyers of the flats commensurate with the […]
Understand the extension of IBC section 14 Bar to actions under SARFAESI. Learn how this ruling impacts enforcement of security interests in corporate debtor cases.
