All High Courts

Transfer of shares cannot be construed as transfer of assets

M/S Gillette India Limited Vs Delhi Development Authority (Delhi High Court)

M/s. Gillette India Limited Vs Delhi Development Authority (Delhi High Court) It is well settled that shares of a company are a separate asset wholly distinct from the assets held by the company. In the present case, there was dilution of the share capital of TGC as well as transfer of shares held by the […]...

Read More

Central Excise and Service Tax Audit for pre GST period | section 174(2)

Suresh Kumar Singhal Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court)

Suresh Kumar Singhal Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court) Provision incorporated in the Constitution Act, 2016 as aforesaid, in no manner, restrict the operation of the provisions of section 174(2) incorporated in CGST Act beyond the period of one year, which provides that repeal of the Acts specified in sub-section (1) of section 174...

Read More

Officers of GST department think they are above law; HC stays provisional attachment order

Patran Steel Rolling Mill Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Gujarat High Court)

One fails to understand why the concerned officer has at all attended the proceedings, if he had not bothered to come with the files. It is evident that the concerned officer must be availing of leave as well as other benefits for the purpose of coming from Bhavnagar to Ahmedabad. However, in absence of the files, the entire purpose of co...

Read More

Negotiable Instrument Act covers not only debt but also covers Later Liability

Madan Tiwari Vs Yashwant Kumar Sahu (Chhattisgarh High Court)

Madan Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court) Purport of the special law under the Negotiable Instruments Act is to ensure that the promise to pay is abided by the person so promising. The provision under Section 139 of the NI Act is that it shall be presumed that the holder of a cheque […]...

Read More

Non Filing of Income Tax Return | Offence under Section 276CC

Jay Polychem India Ltd. Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)

Offence under section 276CC stood committed upon the non-filing of return under section 142(1) within the prescribed time limit. Hence, no case was made out for discharge of assessee....

Read More

Tax deducted is income received U/s 198 of the IT Act

Sri Y. Rathiesh V. CIT (Andhra Pradesh High Court)

Whenever an amount deducted as tax at source becomes incapable of being being adjusted or counted towards tax payable, it acquired the character of an  income. In such an event, it partake the character of any other income and is liable to be dealt with accordingly....

Read More

Addition for Value of stock shown to bank in excess of that as per accounts

Pr. CIT Vs  Gladder Ceramics Ltd. (Gujarat High Court)

Where the value of stock shown to bank for purpose of availing of higher credit facility was based on market rate and not at cost price but there was no difference in quantitative details, no addition under section 69B could be made. ...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 27(1)(c) cannot be levied for not following FIFO method

Pr. CIT­ Vs Prakash Mangilal Jain (Bombay High Court)

Pr. CIT Vs Prakash Mangilal Jain (Bombay High Court) Following FIFO or LIFO method cannot be the basis for levying penalty as per the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act. In order to justify the levy of penalty, two factors must co-exist, (i) there must be some material or circumstances leading to the reasonable […]...

Read More

Unclaimed creditors to be added to Income u/s 41, even if the same is not written back in Income statement

M/s. West Asia Exports & Imports Vs. ACIT (Madras High Court)

M/s. West Asia Exports & Imports Vs. ACIT (Madras High Court) We know that Sec 41(1) of Income Tax Act 1961, where there is cessation of any trading liability then the benefit accruing on account of cessation of such liability will be deemed to profits and gains of business or profession whether or not such […]...

Read More

Reassessment after 4 years where assessee made true and full disclosure in original assessment was not valid

DCIT Vs Visvas Promoters (P) Ltd. (Madras High Court)

Reassessment after period of four years on the ground that assessee had claimed excess deduction under Section 80IB(10) was not valid where assessee had made true and full disclosure and had consciously made only a proportionate claim under Section 80IB(10), which was rightly allowed by AO at the time of original assessment proceedings un...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,148)
Company Law (4,737)
Custom Duty (7,278)
DGFT (3,931)
Excise Duty (4,195)
Fema / RBI (3,697)
Finance (3,893)
Income Tax (29,914)
SEBI (3,134)
Service Tax (3,452)