Refusal to issue customs clearance to the High Alumina Refractory Cement (HARC) imported – demand for production of BIS certificate for the goods imported by the petitioners
M/s. Mili Enterprise Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) High Court issued notices to the Government observing that the department should at least provide the reason for blocking the input tax credit and it should be specified in a notice under rule 86(A). FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT Heard learned Advocate […]
Vennapusa Venkata Subba Reddy Vs Union of India (Andhra Pradesh High Court) It is allegged that petitioner has issued fake GST invoices with a total turnover of Rs. 397,28,11,944/- without supply of goods to different business firms/companies by passing on a total fraudulent input tax credit of Rs. 61,30,33,274/- in respect of 21 firms, out […]
M/s. Kone Elevators (India) Pvt. Limited Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) Undoubtedly, the assessee had not submitted the ratification certificate to be obtained from the CBDT for claiming exemption under Section 10B of the Act. However, there are certain confusions even within the Department Officials regarding production of such ratification certificate from the CBDT. The […]
Director Identification Numbers (DINs) of assesses-director allotted under Rule 10 of the Companies (Appointments and Qualifications of Directors) Rules, 2014, were not liable to be deactivated or cancelled solely for the reason that assesses-director stood disqualified for appointment / reappointment as Directors of Companies by operation of Section 164(2).
mere legal ownership will not be enough to fasten liability on the assessee in respect of the market value of the seized assets even though the said seized assets belong to the assessee. The Court held that on the valuation date the right of the assessee was in jeopardy and therefore having regard to the definition of net wealth and asset as appearing in Section 2(e) of the Wealth-tax Act, the Wealth-tax Officer was not justified in estimating the value of such asset.
Vishwataj Developers Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) Conclusion: In present case, the Hon’ble high court held Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked in a routine manner, when dispute pertains to examination of facts and when there is alternative efficacious remedy available. Held: The assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) of the […]
Commissioner Vs National Remote Sensing Agency (Telangana High Court) the only issue which this Court is now required to consider is as to whether the respondent-NRSA had any intent to evade service tax on its activities during the period 16.07.2001 to 31.03.2005 and on advances received during the period 16.06.2005 to 31.12.2005, justifying the action […]
Chen Hsui Yun Vs Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (Delhi High Court) In the instant case, according to the respondent, amount of USD 90000 was recovered from the petitioner which was around Rs.65,00,000/- in Indian currency. The petitioner in the instant case is a lady, aged about 54 years, and there is nothing on record to […]
As the law required that an enquiry be held under Section 202 of the Code if the accused stayed outside the Court’s jurisdiction, such enquiry had to be undertaken in clear terms and the Trial Court, after making such enquiry whether by taking evidence on affidavit or by restricting the enquiry to examination of documents or not, was required to decide whether there were sufficient grounds to issue process against the accused.
