In the given case, the writ petitioner has requested Income Tax Department for the adjournment of 3 weeks to respond to the show cause notice on account of the lockdown declared by the Government of India across India so as to effectively deal with the Covid-19 pandemic.
Lalit Kumar Gandhi Vs State of M.P. (Madhya Pradesh High Court) This is an application made by the applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail during trial. The allegation against the applicant is that he had received a sum of about Rs.6,52,00,000/- from the applicant for supply of pesticides and insecticides and as […]
Bombay High Court had upheld the constitutional validity of Section 140(5) of the Companies Act but held that it would not apply to auditors who had resigned and also squashed the prosecution or the criminal complaints filed by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) against the erstwhile auditors of Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Ltd (IL&FS) and its non-bank lending arm for alleged collusion in falsifying books terming it to be ‘ bad in law’.
Claim of SBI on income tax refund credited in the the defaulters’ bank account with it would get priority over the government dues including the service tax dues as per section 31-B of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 and sec. 26E of the SARFAESI Act,2002 w.e.f.1.9.2016.
Niyasha Barman Vs ITO (Calcutta High Court) There subsists an order dated March 20, 2020 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court directing the revenue authorities not to initiate any recovery proceedings during the subsistence of the COVID-19 pandemic. In my view, interest of justice would be subserved by directing the banks of the petitioners to […]
Mahadeo Construction Co. Vs Union of India (Jharkhand High Court) High Court held that interest liability under section 50 is although automatic, but it’s computation and demand can be raised only after initiation of Adjudication proceedings under Section 73 or 74 in case the assesse disputes the demand of interest. Whether garnishee proceedings under Section […]
The Dynasty Vs The State of Assam (Gauhati High Court) Conclusion: Where two views were possible, an interference by an appellate or a revisional court would be unwarranted merely because the other view appeared to be more attractive, thus, no interference was required in the judgment of the Assam Board of Revenue in respect of the […]
PCIT Vs MLS CBRE South Asia Private Limited ((Delhi High Court) So far as the amount of Rs.4,73,39,848/- being the excess. Remuneration paid to Sh. Anshuman Magazine is concerned, we find the assessee has obtained approval of the competent authority though on 18.07.2011 i.e. much after the date on which such remuneration has been paid. In […]
A person who has purchased the property using proceeds of crime cannot said to have any interest in the property and the protection under Article 300 A cannot be pressed into service by a perpetrator of a crime. Mere order of attachment could not be said to be violative of the constitutional right to property of the Article 300 A of the Constitution of India.
PCIT Vs Prince Water House (Calcutta High Court) Order dated 23.03.2015 passed by the AO giving effect to the directions of the tribunal dated 04.03.2014 (passed u/s 254 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act) did not deal with the issue of allowability of premium on account of Accountants Risk Policy. The show cause notice u/s 263 […]
