The court set aside reassessment proceedings after finding doubt over valid service of notices. Failure to ensure proper communication denied the assessee a fair hearing.
The High Court quashed an ex-parte appellate order after finding that penalty was enhanced without giving the taxpayer an opportunity of hearing. The ruling holds that such enhancement violates Section 107(11) and principles of natural justice.
The Supreme Court rejected the Revenue’s delayed appeal where reassessment was initiated repeatedly for the same year. The ruling confirms that completed reassessment on merits cannot be reopened again.
The Court held that reassessment cannot be initiated once an assessment is conclusively closed. Supreme Court directions on reassessment notices were found inapplicable to finalized cases.
The Court examined whether a motorcycle could be confiscated when illicit liquor was carried by a rider without owner involvement. It held that absence of use of the vehicle for transport and lack of owner connivance invalidated confiscation.
The Court quashed a confiscation order after finding no proof of personal notice to the owner. The ruling underscores that meaningful notice and opportunity are mandatory before confiscation.
The Tribunal held that although profiteering was initially computed, the developer had already passed on a higher amount to the buyer. With full discharge of Section 171 obligations, proceedings were closed.
The Court examined whether an owner could be blamed when a stolen vehicle was misused for illegal liquor transport. It ruled that provisional release was justified after ownership verification and furnishing of sureties, despite confiscation liability.
Jacob P P Vs Alka Ventures Pvt Ltd (NCLT Kochi) Homebuyers in the SKYWINGS Township Project filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), moratorium, and appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) against the corporate debtor. The petitioners represented 98 allottees […]
The Court examined whether the Rajasthan ACB could investigate corruption cases against Central Government employees without CBI approval. It held that the ACB has concurrent jurisdiction under the PC Act and such investigations are valid in law.
