Metharam Pinjani Vs Income Tax Department (Madhya Pradesh High Court) Learned counsel for the assessee/petitioner submits that despite the said prayer having been made for personal hearing contained in Para 7 of the reply (at Page No. 115 of the Paper Book), no personal hearing was afforded and the impugned order was passed thereby amounting […]
Assistant Commissioner of Taxes, Bongaigaon, has reported that there is no record of the vehicle and there is also no proper document to support transportation of goods by the said vehicle as indicated by the petitioner in his petition as well as in the complaint. That being so, whatever papers submitted by the petitioner to prove the genuineness of his GST payment appears not only to be incorrect, but false also.
Reeta Devi Vs Sima Devi (Jharkhand High Court) Going by the definition of wages as given under Section 2(m) of the Employees Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 Act the contention of the Insurance Company that food allowance of Rs.80 per day shall not constitute part of wages is not tenable. A plain reading of the definition […]
Dineshbhai Dhudabhai Patel Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) Facts in brief would indicate that the petitioner was working as a Junior Clerk (Administration). Pursuant to a selection held by the Gujarat Panchayat Services Selection Board, he was engaged in a five years contract basis by an order dated 08.12.2011. A complaint was filed […]
PCIT Vs Orchid Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. (Calcutta High Court) Tribunal agreed with CIT(A) that after conversion of inventory into fixed asset the firm revalued the developed land including construction thereon in order to bring it in line with the current market value to justify the business assistance secured by the firm from the banks […]
Considering the fact that cases of coal theft and carrying coals without GST, etc have become so common that unless such offences are thoroughly investigated, it will cause huge loss to the State exchequer. To unearth the fact of the case and to see the nature of involvement of the petitioner, custodial interrogation is necessary.
Raghunandan Enterprise Vs ACIT (Gujarat High Court) The plain reading of Section-281B of the Act would make it clear that the same provides for the provisional attachment of the property belonging to the assessee for a period of six months from the date of such attachment unless extended, but excluding the period of stay of […]
Ravindra Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh high Court) The general rule of criminal justice is that ‘a crime never dies’. The principle is reflected in the well-known maxim nullum tempus aut locus occurrit regi (lapse of time is no bar to Crown in proceeding against offenders). The Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to […]
Tajunissa Vs Mr. Vishal Sharma (Delhi High Court) Statutory proscription engrafted in Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act, therefore, the Supreme Court has, in the afore-extracted passage from Mardia Chemicals, chiseled out an exception, in a case in which for example, the action of the secured creditor is alleged to be fraudulent or his claim […]
Silpa Shaji Vs Satheesh K.S. (Kerala High Court) it is an admitted fact that the petitioner has no job or income and she alleged to be residing at the house of her cousin sister for the time being. The same would go to show that the petitioner wants to transfer four cases pending before the […]
