Delhi High Court held that person aggrieved by the provisional attachment order passed by the Adjudicating Authority should prefer an appeal to Appellate Tribunal under section 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA]. Accordingly, writ petition disposed of.
Bombay High Court held that dispute between SEBI and petitioner regarding opening of Demat Account in fictitious and benami name and making of large applications in IPO is settled and the said dispute is predominantly commercial in nature having little criminal overtone. Hence, order quashed and set aside.
Allahabad High Court held that filing of writ petition only with intent to evade pre-deposit of 10% as provided in Goods and Services Tax Act is incorrect. Accordingly, petition is misconceived and is dismissed.
Gujarat High Court held that crude palm kernel oil edible grade eligible for exemption in terms of entry 33A/57 of exemption notification. Accordingly, show cause notice is quashed and set aside.
Telangana High Court held that sale of undertaking as a going concern falls within the definition of a slump sale as set out in Section 2(42C) of the Income Tax Act hence section 41(2) dealing with taxation of gains on sale of certain depreciable assets doesn’t apply.
The Kerala High Court held that scrutiny of exempted trust returns was correctly conducted as complete scrutiny, allowing assessment of appropriation of receipts under Section 12A.
A GST demand and recovery order was invalidated as the issuing officer acted beyond jurisdiction. The matter is remitted to a new officer for reconsideration. This ensures fair process and proper application of the law.
Calcutta High Court rules that the Income Tax Department cannot retain a refund under Section 245 without an outstanding tax liability, ordering release of Rs.22,73,833/- with interest.
The Calcutta High Court dismissed the revenue’s appeal against the ITAT, holding that the assessee properly identified shareholders and explained the share premium, making Section 68 inapplicable. The ruling confirms that proper documentation can prevent share capital additions.
Delhi High Court refused waiver of pre-deposit for CHAs implicated in misuse of licenses for illegal imports, allowing appeals to be filed before CESTAT.
