Bombay High Court rejected the pre-arrest bail as premature as the apprehension of the applicant that he will be arrested is without any basis.
Ernst And Young Limited Vs Additional Commissioner CGST (Delhi High Court) In the present case, the petitioner has provided professional services in terms of the service agreements to overseas entities (EY Entities). It had issued the invoices for the said services directly to EY Entities and had received the invoiced consideration from EY Entities, in […]
Manishkumar Tulsidas Kaneriya Vs ACIT (Gujarat High Court) Section 144, contemplates providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard before making assessment. The First Proviso mentions that such opportunity shall be given by the assessing officer by serving notice to the assessee, mentioning date and time for completion of the assessment to the best of […]
The impugned notice, other than merely quoting that the Insight portal contains information as stated by the Assessing Officer in his reasons for the reopening, does not further investigate the information or come to an independent assessment connecting the petitioner to the particular transactions specified in the information.
Delhi High Court restrained Institute Of Cost Accountants Of India from using ICAI acronym, a trademark which stands registered in favour of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Calcutta High Court held that for earlier assessment years already tax in respect of sale of shares was treated and accepted as long term capital gains. Thus, when the shares were held to be investments and accepted as earlier AYs, it cannot be said to be not an investment in the current AY. Accordingly, profit taxable as capital gains and not business income.
Reopening of the assessment based on a different method of computation or application of the section was nothing else but a change of opinion as there was no failure to make a full and true disclosure ans the same was impermissible in law.
Lyka Labs Limited Vs State of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court) Bombay High Court held that the signatory of the cheque, authorized by the “Company”, is not the drawer in terms of section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act and cannot be directed to pay interim compensation under section 143A. Facts- The issue involves that whether […]
Bombay High Court held that only reason for re-assessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is adoption of different opinion on the question of valuation as against the one adopted by petitioner. Accordingly, such re-assessment proceedings is liable to be quashed and set aside.
Delhi High Court held that rejection of refund application on allegation of fake credit availed by the supplier is unsustainable in absence of any establishment of non-supply of goods from the said supplier.
