Shri Sai Co-Operative Thrift and Credit Society Ltd. Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) In the present case, though the petitioner responded to the show cause notice, yet it could not provide all the relevant details and documents, as the time period of three days to respond to the show cause notice was inadequate. Consequently, this […]
Late Shri Nemichand Gunavanthraj Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) We noted that the assessee has moved this petition under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules and filed additional evidences i.e., confirmation letters from relatives, copies of Income-tax returns, copies of financial statements, copies of wealth tax returns of the relatives to prove the creditworthiness of the […]
The provisions of Section 18 of the Limitation Act are not alien to and are applicable to proceedings under the IBC
Sneha Nerli Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) We are of the opinion that assessee has to prove with evidences that sufficient cash was available to deposit to her bank account. In the present case, assessee claimed that she has been working in Dubai and that the cash deposit in India were on account of amounts earned […]
Giant Construction Company Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) The petitioner assails the communication dated 21.04.2022 by which the objections raised by the petitioner to the reopening of the assessment were rejected. The petitioner asserts that the impugned communication is in contravention of the amended Section 148-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Upon the insertion […]
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 […]
Ericsson India Private Limited Vs Commissioner, Customs (CESTAT Delhi) CESTAT held that amount paid for the same duty but twice, one of the payment has to be refunded. Otherwise also in terms of section 17 of Limitation Act, whenever there is an application for a relief from the consequences of a mistake, the period of […]
This criminal case is filed by the Official Liquidator under section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956 as the accused persons did not file statement of affairs within the stipulated time.
Board of Trustees for Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port Vs Marinecraft Engineers Private Limited (Calcutta High Court) The disputes between the parties pertain to the deductions made by the petitioner under diverse heads from the moneys which were due and payable to the respondent. The respondent being a unit entitled to the benefits of the Micro […]
Indus Towers Ltd Vs Income Tax Officer (Delhi High Court) Having perused the letter dated 9th May, 2022 written by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Jaipur, this Court is of the view that the said Income Tax Officer had no jurisdiction to issue notice dated 14th March, 2022 to propose initiation of reassessment proceedings, […]
