Shrikant Mohta Vs Republic of India (Orissa High Court) Conclusion: There had been no substantial change in circumstances after rejection of the last bail application of assessee by the court in January this year and subsequent dismissal of his SLP by the Supreme Court in February. Further, huge number of documents had been seized and […]
Airlink Communication Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) Mr. Ankit Shah, learned counsel for the respondent – Department has only submitted that according to the instructions received and as stated in the affidavit in reply since the subsequent quantification which the Department treats as final qualification being later in point of time […]
Bhagwat Joshi @ Shankar Lal Joshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court) Condition for grant of bail should not be stringent, as it would violate accused right of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT “The delicate light of the law favours release […]
Chennai Port trust was not eligible for exemption under Section 29(a) of the Urban Land Tax Act as it did not produce any evidence to prove that the Lands were owned by the Central Government and that the Madras Dock Labour Board was only the ostensible owner. Indeed, the evidence on record indicated that the Madras Dock Labour Board was both the ostensible and real owner and the Lands were assessed to urban land tax and that the Madras Dock Labour Board paid urban land tax as and when demanded. Moreover, the Board Circular dated 30.06.1976 expressly provided that lands owned by the Madras Port Trust would not be eligible for the exemption under Section 29(a).
Kamat Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) In this case the Assessing Officer (AO) vide Order dated 31.01.2014 disallowed deductions to the assessee under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (said Act) in respect of its housing project “Kamat Riviera” inter alia on the ground that 4 out of the 60 […]
Venus Recruiters Private Limited Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) Whether an application for avoidance of a Preferential Transaction, though filed prior to the Resolution Plan being approved, can be heard & adjudicated by the NCLT, at the instance of the RP, after the approval of the Resolution Plan? The jurisdiction of the NCLT […]
Share Aids Private Ltd. Vs ITO (Madras High Court) The learned counsel for the Appellant/Assessee Ms. Madhupreetha Elango submitted that the if a loss is caused on the sale of the Capital Assets by the Assessee, the same should be allowed as Business Expenditure under Section 41(2) of the Act as it cannot be brought […]
Glow Grow Health And Beauty (P) Ltd Vs State of Kerala (Kerala High Court) The petitioners have approached this Court impugning Exts.P2 to P4 of assessment orders passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act. In the Writ Petition, it is their case that prior to Exts.P2 to P4 assessment orders, they were subjected to […]
A lawyer generally has no implied or apparent authority to make an admission or statement which would directly surrender or conclude the substantial legal rights of the client unless such an admission or statement is clearly a proper step in accomplishing the purpose for which the lawyer was employed
Neeraj Karande Vs Directorate General of GST Intelligence (Telangana High Court) In view of the above rival submissions, the allegations against the petitioner are that he has collected and issued invoices or bills without actual supply of goods in violation of the provisions of the CGST Act and the rules made thereunder leading to wrongful […]
