Madras High Court held that since petitioner failed to comply with notice issued in Form DRC-01, the matter will restore back to the file of AO provided petitioner deposits 25% of disputed tax amount.
The Liquidator published Sale Notice for reserve price on 12.08.2021 fixing sale price of 6.50. No bids came hence another e-Auction Notice was issued. The Appellant submitted its e-bid in pursuance of Sale Notice 12.09.2021.
ITAT Delhi held that CIT(A) wrongly deleted addition made by AO towards one fifth of the expenses since assessee failed to produce documentary evidences of the expenses. Accordingly, appeal of the revenue allowed.
Bombay HC clarifies ‘already pending or decided’ under CGST Act. Respondent directed to resolve advance ruling application within 3 months.
SEBI clarifies that FPIs can issue ODIs referencing cash market securities but not with derivative instruments as the underlying.
ITAT Ahmedabad imposed cost of Rs. 5,000 for non-compliance before CIT(A) and held that the assessee can’t simply escape by placing the blame on the Tax Consultant. Thus, matter restored back to the file of AO.
Tamil Nadu Grama Bank challenges EPF assessment order in Madras HC, claiming exemption based on its own pension scheme under the Employees’ Provident Funds Act.
“Analysis of Vijay Singh Jakhar vs ESIC case, addressing liability under ESI Act for non-payment of contributions and the definition of ‘principal employer.'”
“Bombay High Court quashes FIR against Pidilite manager citing double jeopardy. Incident involved factory fire causing injuries. Read key legal arguments and judgment.”
Telangana High Court’s ruling in the Syndicate Bank case clarifies the priority of provident fund contributions over other debts.
