Bhoomi Developers Vs Union Of India & Ors. (High Court Bombay) Issue raised in the present writ petition i.e. eligibility of the petitioner or maintainability of its declaration to avail the benefits of the scheme under the category of investigation, enquiry or audit on the ground that amount of the service tax dues of the […]
Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Vs Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd. (Bombay High Court) Whether for the period prior to 01.03.2006, service tax is recoverable on entire interest component collected as equated monthly installments on transactions relating to ‘Financial Leasing Services including equipment leasing and hire-purchase’, in absence of any mechanism to bifurcate the […]
Kaushal Kumar Mishra Vs. Additional Director General, Ludhiana Zonal Unit And Another (High Court Of Punjab And Haryana) High Court held that we are of the view that the investigations being conducted by competent Officers against the petitioner are not hit by provisions of Section 6(2)(b) of CGST Act, 2017. So, we see no reason […]
Section 153A Invalid Where Statement Belonging And Pertaining To Person Other Than Searched Person Used To Assume Jurisdiction and Only Section 153C Can Be Invoked And Without Cross Examination Of Witness There Can Be No Valid Proceedings Under Law.
Sabka Vishwas (LDR) Scheme – Statement by Director during enquiry is admission of liability: The Bombay High Court has reiterated that for eligibility under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, the quantification need not be on completion of investigation by issuing show-cause notice or the amount that may be determined upon adjudication before the cut-off date.
It is submitted that it is a case of total evasion of GST and disposing the manufactured goods without showing any record about its manufacturing activity and clandestine purchase of such products without paying of any GST has resulted in evasion to the tune of Rs. 9 Crores and odd
Dev Wines Sales Corporation Vs PCIT (Delhi High Court) An order of transfer is more in the nature of an administrative exercise of power and the scope of interference wherein in any case is limited and unless the administrative power is shown to have been exercised without authority under the law and/or for mala fide […]
Tata Starbucks Private Limited Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) Subject to the petitioner depositing the entire principal profiteered amount i.e. Rs. 1,04,70,664/- as levied excluding the GST amount already deposited, within four months, in equal monthly instalments, there shall be a stay, as far as the direction for payment is concerned. FULL TEXT […]
Lupita Saluja Vs DGGI (Delhi High Court) It is not in dispute that on the day the impugned order has been passed, the said Judge granted regular bail to the husband of the applicant after spending nearly 50 days in custody who is the person involved in day-to-day affairs of the company, however, dismissed the […]
The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.
