Rajesh Kumar Yaduvanshi Vs. Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) & Anr. (Delhi High Court) The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning a summoning order dated 16.08.2019 issued by the learned ASJ in Complaint Case No. 770/2019 captioned “Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) v. Bhushan Steel Limited and Ors.”, to the limited extent that it […]
High court held that since the defaulter had transferred the property in favour of his brother’s wife, by appointing his own brother as the Power Agent to act on his behalf and such a sale has happened within six months from the date of which the demand of arrears of tax was made, it can be said there are no bona fides in such a transfer.
The issue under consideration is whether the expenditure incurred towards upgraded and development of a product was to be considered as capital expenditure or revenue expenditure?
Hon’ble Kerala High Court has held that bank guarantee shall not be encashed till such time where assessee preferred appeal against the detention order before the Appellate authority.
The issue under consideration is whether TDS on Cash Withdrawal u/s 194N is applicable even though the sums withdrawn is not constitute income in the hands of the recipient?
PCIT Vs Shitalben Saurabh Vora (Gujarat High Court) The issue in the present case relates whether the amount deposited by the assessee in the form of cash/cheques represents the income of the assessee. Admittedly, there was huge deposit of cash/cheques in the bank account of the assessee. But on perusal of the bank statement, it […]
High Court directed the petitioner to deposit principal profiteered amount but stayed interest and penalty imposed by National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA).
The issue under consideration is whether Disqualified Director whose DIN and DSC has been frozen by the ROC due to non compliance will be eligible for Companies Fresh Start Scheme 2020?
Gurvinder Singh Sohal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (Punjab High Court) The prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner regarding his alleged involvement in Bribery Case. In the present case, the petitioner and the other officials has raided the premises of the complainant and on that day, 03 other […]
It is the case of the petitioner that the transportation was of a consignment of watches that had been supplied to him by the seller in Delhi at a discounted rate of Rs.8.99. It is seen that the transportation of the goods was accompanied by Ext.P4 tax invoice, where the supplier in Delhi had shown the actual price of the consignment of watches, which was Rs.4,49,550/- and had given a discount of almost the entire amount save to the extent of Rs.8.99, and had paid IGST at the rate of 18% on the actual value of the watches.
