In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court while providing relief to the Appellants have observed that any untoward incident i.e. injury or death caused during travelling in Trains have to be compensated by the Railways and the plea of negligence of the victim as a contributing factor will not fall under the proviso to Section 124-A of the Railways Act.
Madras High Court held that proceedings initiated under section 129 of the CGST Act invalid as detention order and notice was not served within the prescribed time limit.
PCIT Vs Amway India Enterprises (Delhi High Court) In the present appeal, the learned counsel for the Appellant states that the ITAT erred in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and failed to appreciate the fact that the royalty payment is excessive and not at arm’s length on consideration of Advertisement, Marketing and Promotion (‘AMP’) […]
Delhi HC quashes order under Section 148A(d), remands to Assessing Officer. Petitioner to provide sale/purchase deed for fresh decision.
Balaji Enterprises Vs Principal Additional Director General, Directorate General of GST Intelligence & Ors. (Delhi High Court) A perusal of the SCN would reveal, that there is next to nothing stated, as to the reason why the concerned authority proposed the cancellation of registration. As a matter of fact, the concerned authority, ironically, put the […]
CIT-International Taxation Vs Travelport L.P. USA (Delhi High Court) Learned counsel for the Appellant-Revenue states that the ITAT has erred in holding that only 15% of the revenue is attributable to the assessee’s PE in India by mechanically applying the ratio of the judgment of DIT vs. Galileo International Inc., (2009) 180 Taxman 357 (Delhi) […]
Ester Industries Ltd Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) High Court is of the view that the condition precedent of an asset in the form of Rs.50 lakhs is not be attracted to the present case, as the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act had been issued on 17th March, 2022 i.e. within three years […]
Bird Worldwide Flight Services (I.) Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court) Court is of the view that the Petitioner has a right to get adequate time under Section 148A of the Act to respond to the show cause notice. It is pertinent to mention that Section 148A(b) of the Act permits the Assessing Officer […]
CIT Vs State Bank of Bikaner (Rajasthan High Court) On perusal of Sec.36(1)(va) and Sec.43(B)(b) and analyzing the judgements rendered, in our view as well, it is clear that the legislature brought in the statute Section 43(B)(b) to curb the of such tax payers who did not discharge their statutory liability of payment of dues, as […]
Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (Karnataka High Court) In the present case, admittedly, though the employer did not deposit the contribution, within the stipulated time, as contemplated by paragraph-3O of the PF Scheme or before the due date under the provisions of the PF scheme/Act, he deposited the contribution to the PF/ESI fund before […]
