While computing the limitation period of 30 days prescribed under Section 138(b) N.I. Act for issuance of a valid legal notice, the day on which intimation is received by the complainant from the bank that the cheque in question has been returned unpaid has to be excluded.
Karnataka HC: Ola Cabs face copyright infringement charges by Lahari Recording Company for displaying music videos in Ola Prime cabs. Legal analysis included.
Rajdeep Marketing Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer (Bombay High Court) HC observed that, If on identical reasons raised for Assessment Year 2012-13 petitioner’s explanation has been accepted and no addition made, certainly on the same ground, we wonder how an allegation of escapement of income can be made for the subsequent Assessment Years. In […]
As per clause (b) of Section 130-E of the Act, an appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court against an order passed by the Appellate Tribunal which relates among other things to the determination of any question having relation to rate of duty of customs or to the value of goods for the purpose of assessment.
Nag Leathers Pvt. Ltd Vs Muzain Hides (Madras High Court) It is evident that there is a categorical finding recorded by the Apex Court that the moratorium provision contained in Section 14 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, would apply only to corporate debtor, the natural persons mentioned in Section 141 continuing to be statutorily liable […]
M/s. UCN Cable Network (P) Ltd. Vs. Designated Committee under SVLDR Scheme, 2019 (Bombay High Court, Nagpur) Completion Of Investigation Not a Condition Precedent For Eligibility Under ‘Sabka Vishwas’ (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme 2019 The Hon’ble Bombay High Court while quashing the Designated Committee’s decision of rejecting declaration under the Amnesty SVLDR Scheme observed that […]
Regulation 72(1) provides that an officer or employee shall be eligible for payment of gratuity either as per the provisions of the Act of 1972 or as per Sub-regulation (2) whichever is higher. Thus, it is beyond doubt that an employee must receive gratuity whichever is more beneficial either under the Act of 1972 or under the Regulations framed by the bank. However, this is not the same thing as to suggest that an employee can choose computation of gratuity under one statute and seek benefits of other provisions under another statute. As we have noticed, the scheme of gratuity under the Act of 1972 and under the regulations framed by the bank are different.
Punjab & Haryana HC quashed the detention order and notice issued under Section 130 of the CGST Act, whereby the Petitioner’s goods were seized by the Authorities for the non-payment of tax by the supplier of goods.
Commercial Court shall have power to provide a new time period for filing written statement under section 15(4) of the Act, 2015 itself, independent of Section 148 CPC.
HC held that condition precedent for exercise of power under Rule 86A of the GST Rules is the availability of credit in the electronic credit ledger which is alleged to be ineligible. If credit balance is available, then the authority may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, not allow the debit of amount equivalent to such credit. However, there is no power of negative block for credit to be availed in future.
