Join our webinar on July 24-25 for an in-depth analysis of Union Budget 2024. Learn about tax proposals, sector impacts, and investment insights. Register now!
Join CA Sachin Jain for a live course on Input Tax Credit from a litigation perspective. Gain practical insights and master ITC complexities. Register now!
Net Direct Tax collections for the Financial Year 2022-23 grown at over 45% Net Direct Tax collections for the F.Y. 2022-23 continue to grow at a robust pace further fortifying the economic revival Gross Tax collections for the Financial Year 2022-23 grown at about 40% Advance Tax collections for F.Y. 2022-23 stand at Rs. 1,01,017 […]
Commissioner of CGST Vs Narbada Industries (Jammu & Kashmir High Court) That no refund can be ordered against a party, if that party has not been unjustly enriched or when it has acquired the benefit lawfully. Since the assessee have got the benefit of refund lawfully under the prevailing law, they cannot be directed to […]
Restrained the defendants from offering or advertising any goods or services, using or registering corporate names, domain names or pages bearing the trademarks BURGER KING, BK and/ or any mark deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s trademarks.
Final order in the re-assessment proceedings is yet to be passed. Hence, the writ petition itself was premature and no relief could be granted thereof.
The compensation for medical expenses is a matter of reimbursement and hence once the insurance company has chosen to compensate the victim of road accident for medical expenses, the same cannot be once again claimed under the Motor Vehicles Act
The Arbitral Tribunal had thus, articulated the terms of appointment unequivocally and unambiguously. It had made it clear to the parties that its appointment and the proceedings before them would not be governed by ICADR Rules. Accordingly, arbitral tribunal is not bound by ICADR rules for fixation of the fees
It was clear, therefore, that till such time the purchase order was issued pursuant to such acceptance of the offer made by the Petitioner, there was no completed ‘contract’. Consequently, Clause-6.34.1 would not get attracted.
Commissioner of CE & ST Vs Maneesh Exports (CESTAT Mumbai) The appellants have consumed the duty free raw material for achieving the export obligations on yearly basis and on whole as per the LOP issued to them and amended from time to time. No evidence has been produced by the revenue that the terms of […]
Bhagwan Singh Vs State of Himachal (Himachal High Court) It is concluded that SARFAESI Act and RDB Act shall have overriding effect to provisions of HPVAT Act. Hence, the said property is to be permitted to be transferred in favour of petitioners free from all encumbrances in terms of E-aution. Facts- Petitioners are purchasers of […]
Punjab National Bank Vs Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax, Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT find that there is no controversy regarding the quantum of amount refundable. Further, there is no allegation nor any finding by the Court below with regard to unjust enrichment. Further, in the facts and circumstances, I find that there is […]
