Director of Alchemist Group gets bail from Jharkhand HC. The company is accused of cheating investors on false land booking promises. Details inside.
Delhi HC grants permission to a PMLA accused to travel to Canada for his son’s university admission. The court weighs family bonds and past conduct.
Mere collection of tax by the selling dealer is not sufficient; the tax must be duly paid to the government. The burden of proof lies with the purchasing dealer to substantiate that the tax collected has indeed been paid to the government by the supplier.
Bombay High Court held that validity of circular no. 80/10/2004-ST dated 17 September 2004 cannot be examined vide the present petition as the same is already subject matter of contention in the show cause notice issued to one of the petitioner’s member M/s. Transocean Offshore International Ventures Ltd. and hence designated officer will adjudicate the same.
Delhi High Court held that a person who signed a document which contains contractual terms is normally bound by them, even though he had read them or not. Here, the plaintiff has signed the MoU in token of acceptance of the terms thereof and is bound by the terms thereof, including the Arbitration Agreement.
HC set aside order passed by Assistant Commissioner and held that revenue officers are required to follow principles of judicial discipline and accordingly are bound by decisions of Appellate Authority.
Delhi High Court’s ruling on Vinayak Services PVT LTD vs ITO case: Section 148A(d) order quashed due to time-barred Section 148 notice. Learn more about the judgment.
Delhi High Court held that no additional concession could be included in BIFR [Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction] by the Income Tax Department without any extension or modification of the Scheme.
Uttarakhand High Court held that saving clause under section 174(2)(e) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act permits the initiation of proceedings under service tax post 01.07.2017 i.e. post repeal of the Service Tax regime
Kerala High Court held that ‘electricity’ is not goods as per definition of goods u/s 2(xx) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (KVAT) accordingly not exingible to tax under KVAT.
