Louis Dreyfus Company Asia Pte. Ltd Vs CIT (International Taxation) (Delhi High Court) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the impugned notice dated 30th March, 2019 has been issued under Section 148 of the Act by respondent no.3 based in Mumbai, who is a non-jurisdictional Assessing Officer, he is not entitled to exercise […]
S K Industries Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) it is settled law that, the articles seized by the police, may be released to the person, who in the opinion of the Court, is lawfully entitled to claim, after preparing detailed panchnama of such articles as well as photographs of such articles and security […]
Bhadrish Jayantilal Sheth Vs ITO (Calcutta High Court) In this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment order dated 30th March, 2022 under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 relating to assessment year 2013-2014 on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice by not providing the […]
SL Lumax Ltd. Vs DCIT (Madras High Court) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, HC is inclined to set aside the orders impugned herein as well as in the writ petition and are accordingly, set aside. Consequently, the matter is remanded to the assessing officer to decide the decision for reopening […]
Petitioners further submit that they have paid the amount of purchases in question as well as tax on the same not in cash and all transactions were through banks and petitioners are helpless if at some point of time after the transactions were over,
G.S.T. registration stands restored. If the Department wants to proceed against the writ-applicant in future on any grounds, it may do so in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the writ-applicant.
In the present case, the impugned orders are non-reasoned orders inasmuch as dept have not considered the submissions of the Petitioner in the stay applications and thus, the discretion vested in department has not been exercised judiciously. Further, neither the Assessing Officer nor the PCIT have considered the three basic principles i.e. the prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury while deciding the stay application.
PCIT Vs Central Cottage Industries Corporation of India Ltd (Delhi High Court) This Court is of the view that the issue of rent of ‘A Barracks’ was within the knowledge of the Assessing officer when he had passed the original assessment order as well as the subsequent order under Section 154 of the Act. Consequently, this […]
Jindal Exports And Imports Private Limited Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court) Impugned assessment orders are liable to be set aside as the Petitioner was not given adequate opportunity to file response to the said show cause notice-cum-draft assessment orders. Consequently, as there has been a violation of principle of natural justice, the impugned assessment orders […]
As you are aware that Arbitration is one of the best Alternate Disputes Resolution process, which saves time, money and energy of the parties. The Transfer of Property Act, 1882 no where prohibits deciding of cases through arbitration.
