Reopening of an assessment under Section 148 was not justified on the ground that AO was of the opinion that a contingency might arise in future resulting an escapement of income which would be wholly impermissible and would amount to a rewriting of the statutory provision.
GST registration once granted could be cancelled only if one of the five statutory conditions was found present. Per se, no GST registration may be cancelled by merely describing the firm that had obtained it, was ‘bogus’.
Pankaj s/o Roshan Dhawan Vs National e-Assessment Centre (Bombay High Court) HC held that we are satisfied that the assessment order dated 14.05.2021 has been passed without granting proper and meaningful opportunity to the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice. It is not in dispute that as per show cause notice dated 10.04.2021 […]
PCIT Vs Smt. Sarojini M. Kushe (Karnataka High Court) In the present case, Assessing Officer has adopted the rate of Rs. 1600/- per square feet merely based on the letter given by the developer which is not supported with any particulars. It cannot be ruled out the possibility of the developer giving an inflated figure […]
Experience of a candidate being a relevant criteria in a selection to the post of Assistant Professor, we do not see the Selection Committee as having overstepped its jurisdictional limits while conducting the selection.
Rattan Lal Bhardwaj Vs State Of Himachal Pradesh (Himachal Pradesh High Court) Article 39(d) of the Constitution of India provides for equal pay for equal work. This right of the person for equal pay for equal work is recognized as a fundamental right by various pronouncements of the Apex Court and the law is settled […]
Swetabh Suman Vs Central Bureau of Investigation (Uttarakhand High Court) The conviction of the appellant Swetabh Suman for the offence punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is upheld and confirmed. The sentence imposed on the appellant Swetabh Suman under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of […]
Sanjay Vs The State of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court) In the present case, absolutely no reason is forthcoming, nor the respondents have come with case as to what was the cause for terminating the Part Time Chairmanship of the petitioner. The State Government can only exercise this power on the basis of any relevant and […]
Galaxy Mechanical Engineering Equipments Private Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (Calcutta High Court) In this matter, petitioner has challenged the impugned show-cause notice for cancellation of registration of the petitioner and suspending the registration of the petitioner by the same impugned show-cause notice itself and petitioner has further challenged the impugned show-cause notice for cancellation of […]
PCIT Vs Vikas Telecom Ltd (Delhi High Court) In this case the learned Assessing Officer while farming the assessment order has not referred to any seized documents belonging to the assessee found during the course of search proceedings. In the remand proceedings the learned Assessing Officer has also submitted that no any incriminating materials have […]
