Bombay High Court held that section 129E of the Customs Act was amended on 1st October 2014 incorporating mandatory requirement of pre-deposit is constitutionally valid and cannot be held to be unreasonable, onerous, unfair or discriminatory.
RSB Transmissions India Limited Vs Union of India (Jharkhand High Court) A combined reading of Section 49(1) of CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 87 (6) and (7) of CGST Rules, 2017 both go to show that such deposit does not mean that the amount is appropriated towards the Government exchequer. On other hand other, a […]
Delhi High Court granted release from detention to detenu on the ground of supply of illegible/ dim/ blank pages of Relied Upon Documents (RUDs). Detention order set aside.
Mukesh D. Ramani Vs State of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court) It is settled law that liability for duty of the company cannot be fastened upon the Directors of the company unless there is statutory provision to that effect. Since the BST Act did not contain any provision to the effect making the Directors liable for […]
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act not leviable in absence of deliberate intention to either conceal income or to furnish inaccurate particulars
Badiger Raghavendra Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Karnataka High Court) Petitioner, a ‘registered supplier’ under section 22 r/w section 26 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is grieving before the Writ Court as to non-consideration of his Revocation Applications dated 25.03.2021 & 26.04.2021 respectively at Annexures-F & G wherein he has […]
Delhi High Court held that delay in payment under Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act 2020 on account of death of Managing Director of the company deserves to be condoned as the said event is extraordinary and exceptional in nature.
Karnataka High Court held that application filed u/s. 50 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, seeking permission to record written statement of accused, is not maintainable before the learned Magistrate
Madras High Court held that even if the accused was not involved in the criminal activity that generated the proceeds of crime, but, if he is involved in some way or the other with the proceeds of crime so generated, he would be liable to be prosecuted under Section 3 read with 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Mahalaxmi Infra Contract Ltd. Vs Goods and Services Tax Council (Jharkhand High Court) In the instant case it appears that on account of an inadvertent error, the entry relating to Tax Invoice No. 01/2018- 19 dated 17th January 2019 could not be reflected in the GSTR-1 filed by the petitioner against the GSTIN of Eastern […]
