Delhi High Court held that the fee earned by the respondent/ assesse (M/s. Fish Poultry and Egg Marketing Committee) from regulating agricultural produce (which includes fish, poultry, and eggs) falls within the scope of Section 10(26AAB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that as petition under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 not maintainable as there was an agreement on procedure to be followed for appointing an arbitrator.
According to provisions of law, mutation is meant for the purpose of identifying person primarily liable for payment of tax. Mutation neither creates nor extinguishes title of any of parties to property.
Sumit Jagdishchandra Agrawal Vs DCIT (Gujarat high court) All original notices under section 148 referable to old regime and issued between 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021 would stand beyond prescribed permissible timeline of six years from end of assessment year 2013-14 and assessment year 2014-15. Therefore, all such notices when they would relate to assessment year 2013-14 […]
Madras High Court held that section 125 is a residuary provision and as there are three specific non-compliances qua statutory requirements, penalty u/s. 125 of Rs. 25,000 each can be invoked for such non-compliances.
HC held that impugned amendment to Rule 89(4) (C) of the CGST Rules, as amended vide Para 8 of Notification 16/2020-CT dated 23.03.2020 is illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, irrational, unfair, unjust and ultra vires Section 16 of the IGST Act and Section 54 of the CGST
Madras High Court held that confirmation of Dabba trading is based on inadmissible piece of evidence. Accordingly, prosecution becomes a futile exercise and hence quashed.
HC observed that against judgment of High Court of Delhi in case of Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., appeal is pending before Supreme Court solely on the point of limitation. Thus, prima facie, Revenue has impliedly conceded that pre-consultation is mandatory.
Bombay High Court held that reassessment proceedings u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act is liable to be quashed and set aside as original assessment was completed after considering all the facts and material.
Admittedly, if a search is conducted by applying Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, there should be a specific authorization. In the instant case, admittedly, there is no warrant authorization to conduct search as per Section 132 of the Income Tax Act on the petitioner.
