Satara District Bar Association Satara Vs State of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court) There is certainly an element of confidentiality in the notings by Judges of any Committee of this Court. There is also very good reason why such notings should not in fact ever be disclosed or allowed to be disclosed. Whether or not this […]
Laxman Vs State of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court) The provisions of Rule 2(p), Rules 58 and 75 of the Rules, 1958 clearly reflect that for a settlement arrived at between the parties by mutual negotiations, the same has to be sent to the State Government, Labour Commissioner and the conciliation officer concerned. The provisions are […]
Iqbal Khan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others (Allahabad High Court) (a) A provision for compassionate appointment is an exception to the principle that there must be an equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. The exception to be constitutionally valid has to be carefully structured and implemented in order to confine compassionate […]
MedGenome Labs Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Central Tax (CESTAT Bangalore) As per Rule 3 of POPS Rules, the place of provision of service shall be the location of the recipient of service. In the present case, the location of the recipient of service is in abroad. Therefore, the service deemed to have been provided in […]
CESTAT Bangalore rules in favor of Anil Kumble, citing precedent. No service tax liability for services provided under agreements with M/s. RCSPL and franchisee.
Shantilal S Jain, HUF Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) In this case CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal on technical ground as the assessee has not file the same electronically as per Rule 45 of the Income-tax Rule. It appears that only one notice was issued by the CIT(A) to the assessee and the status of the […]
Tvl. Alamelu Contracts Vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Madras High Court) The petitioner has challenged the impugned order, dated 16.07.2019, cancelling the Goods and Services Tax Registration. The impugned order preceded the show cause notice, dated 04.07.2019. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner was not having business and therefore, the […]
M. M. Traders State of U P (Allahabad High Court) All the aforequoted writ petitions have been filed aggrieved with blocking of input tax credit by the concerned authority under Rule 86 A of the C.G.S.T. /U.P. G.S.T. Rules, 2017. Rule 86 A(2) of the C.G. & S.T. Rules, 2017, which provides as under :- […]
IBBI notes that delay by Mr. Gupta in providing relevant information to the Authority occurred due to the fact, as submitted by Mr. Gupta, that he was not aware of the filing of FIR against him and he came to know about the lodging of the FIR from the RVO on 26.08.2021. The Authority accepts […]
Nefab India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) The assessee has been merely given a license to use the licensed information/technical know-how during the currency of license agreement. Further, there is a confidentiality clause which prevents the assessee from disclosing the licensed information to a third party. To reiterate, the assessee is not entitled to the […]
