Bali Nagwanshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court) The main contention of the respondent State, respondent-BRPL and respondent- Union of India is this that the whole process for determination of compensation was based on fraud and criminal conspiracy, as out of numerous land oustees, only two of them, namely, Bali Nagwanshi and Neelima Belsariya […]
Since the nature of activities conducted by the Board Of Control for Cricket in India were commercial activities, therefore, the appellant Board was covered by the provisions of ESIC Act and was liable to pay ESI contribution on the wages paid to the coverable employees.
Recovery of demand more than statutory pre-deposit amount, on the basis of adjudication order, which was never served on the petitioner is declared as arbitrary and illegal
There was no right to apply for reference of a dispute to arbitration until there was a clear and unequivocal denial of the right asserted by one party by the other.
As per Rule 142(1)(a) of the JGST Rules, the summary of show cause notice has to be issued electronically to keep track of the proceeding initiated against the registered persona whereas a show cause notice need not necessarily be issued electronically.
PEETEE Coach Builders Private Limited Vs Union of India (Madras High Court) The petitioner has challenged the impugned show cause notice dated 15.12.2020 of the 4th respondent on the ground that the impugned notice is contrary to the circular No.52/26/2018-GST, dated 09.08.2018 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), Central Board […]
Delay in Filing of Appeal beyond period of 1 month condoned as Cancellation of Registration would affect the livelihood and violate Article 21 of Constitution
Gujarat HC directed department to grant refund of IGST already paid by the assessee on the amount of ocean freight charges.
Reopening the assessment under section 148(2), by officer having no jurisdiction over the appellant, vitiate the entire reassessment proceedings initiated against the appellant.
More than adequate opportunities to complete the disciplinary proceedings arising from Departmental Charge Sheet dated 16.07.2015 had been granted by the CAT firstly in 2016, and then again in 2020. Extension rightly not granted
