High Court held that after 1/04/2021, it is mandatory requirement that prior to re-assessment proceedings notice under section 148-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 should be issued to assesseee. Accordingly, the impugned notice dated 31/03/2021 (served through Email to the petitioner on 16/04/2021) stands quashed.
G.k. Construction Company Vs Balaji Makan Samagri Stores (Rajasthan High Court) The core question whether the usage of word ‘may’ in section 148 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 provides a discretion to the Court to impose or not to impose the condition of depositing minimum 20% of the fine amount, is required to be dilated […]
NKAS Services Private Limited Vs. State of Jharkhand (High Court of Jharkhand) A perusal of the impugned show cause notice at Annexure-1 creates a clear impression that it is a Show Cause notice (SCN) issued in a format without even striking out any relevant portions and without stating the contraventions committed by the petitioner. The […]
Ingram Micro Inc. Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) The undisputed fact is that petitioner is not the purchaser of shares of THL. Respondent no.1 has failed to appreciate that the shares have been purchased by IMAHI, a wholly owned subsidiary of petitioner and not by petitioner and, therefore, the question of Section 195 of the […]
Union of India Vs Bundl Technologies Private Limited (Karnataka High Court) In this case The Officers of the Department entered the premises of the Company on 28.11.2019 at 10.30 a.m. During the course of the investigation from 28.11.2019 till 30.11.2019, DGGI Officers issued spot summons to the Directors and employees of the Company and their […]
Rohit Mehta Vs Superintendent (Preventive) (Punjab and Haryana High Court) The contention on behalf of the respondent- Department is that the day of remand is to be excluded while calculating the sixty days period. In view thereof 28.11.2021 would be the Sixtieth day, the same day the complaint had been filed. The application of the […]
Prakash Chandra Purohit Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur Bench) During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondents submit that at present the only purpose of issuing Summons u/s 70 of CGST Act to the petitioners is to record their statements seeking to extract the role of the petitioners in the […]
Indian Metal and Ferro Alloys Ltd Vs CIT (Orissa High Court) The purpose of Section 43B of the Act was to ensure that a liability could be claimed as deduction only if the Assessee has actually parted with the sum without any recourse to it thereafter. In the present case, the interim stay granted in […]
Originative Trading Private Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) The question that arises for the consideration of this Court is whether the remedy of the petitioner to lodge his objection to the order of provisional attachment under section 83 read with Rule 159(1) of the CGST Rules can be effectively exercised without communication […]
High Court held that in absence of specific allegations about the applicant he cannot be prosecuted for any offence under section 138 N.I. Act (Cheque Bounce Case).
