The petitioner has submitted that public in general are cheated in the name of Dream 11 game and people become culprit of gambling and betting without having the proper knowledge of law.
K. Balasubramaniam Vs Commisioner Greater Chennai Corporation (Madras High Court) i) The amendments by way of impugned Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.53 dated 30.03.2022, Gazette Notification dated 11.04.2022 and Council Resolution (CR) Nos.63 of 2022 dated 30.05.2022 (Chennai) and 94 dated 26.05.2022 (Coimbatore) stand confirmed and challenges to the same are dismissed. ii) Property tax General Revision […]
Charanjit Singh Vs Commissioner of Customs (Port) (CESTAT Kolkata) The allegations are made that Appellant had actively participated in the operations regarding fraudulent import of the said cars and undertook the clearance of the cars from Kolkata port, where the said car was cleared as per the declaration. There was no mis-declaration at all as […]
The assignment of debt in favor of another entity partly in exchange of land was integral part of the business activities of the assessee and any gain / loss arising on such an asset should be viewed as business profits only.
Lakshmanan Indirani Vs ACIT (ITAT Chennai) The assessee was subjected to search action u/s 132 on 08-9-2015. During search operations, the jewellery belonging to the assessee and her family members was found. The jewellery weighed 3574.590 Grams which was valued at Rs.85.78 Lacs. In statement u/s 132(4), the assessee submitted that the jewellery belonged to […]
Vinayaka Steels Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court) it was incumbent upon the authority under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 to have heard the petitioner in person, prior to passing of the impugned order. That apart, the impugned order rejects the explanation tendered by the petitioner vide reply dated […]
Not only the order is nonspeaking, but cryptic in nature and the reason of cancellation not decipherable therefrom. Principles of natural justice stand violated and the order needs to be quashed as it entails penal and pecuniary consequences.
Motiprabha Infrated Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (ITAT Patna) Undisputedly, minimum statutory period of 30 days mandated under the provisions of Section 74(A) of CGST/BGST Act, 2017 was not afforded to the petitioner for making payment due and prior to the expiry of 30 days, the assessing officer proceeded to pass the order, ex […]
Balkrishna Industries Limited Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) The petitioner has prayed for direction to refund of Rs. 21,71,74,611/-, which is unutilised input tax credit to be refunded without any Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) debit with interest. Section 16 of the Act allows registered person to take credit on input tax […]
The show cause notice issued to the petitioner in this case shows that the same has been issued in Form GST Reg 31, which is the form for issuing a notice regarding suspension of registration.
