AGL Logistics Private Limited Vs CIT (Delhi High Court) In this case Assessing Officer failed to dispose of stay application dated 10th September, 2021 filed by the Petitioner within four weeks from its filing, as directed by Delhi High Court vide order dated 2nd September, 2021. Assessing Officer states that he could not comply with […]
The act on the part of the respondents of keeping the impugned show cause notices in call book for unduly long period, without disclosing any reason for delay is arbitrary in exercise of powers and is also in violation of provisions of Section 11A of the Customs Act. It would in our opinion vitiate the entire proceedings.
HC held that amendment of Section 14A, which is for removal of doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood.
Himadri Kandarp Mehta L/H of Late Kandarp Yashashvibhai Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court) Law is well settled that unless the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased assessee could be said to have been submitted to the jurisdiction of the assessing officer and have participated in the assessment or re-assessment proceedings, notice to the dead […]
Proper officer cannot proceed to issue DRC-01/01A on matters never intimated to taxpayer in form ASMT 10 pursuant to scrutiny of returns
Rastriya Chemicals & Fertilisers Ltd. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) The Appellant is a Public Sector Undertaking and is a Government Company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies’ Act, 1956. The Appellant engages in the manufacture of fertilizers and other chemicals, falling under Chapter Heading 29 and 31 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Appellant […]
Honble Gujarat High Court held that the date of filing of the application by the petitioner on common portal would be liable to be treated as date of filing claim for refund to the satisfaction of requirement of Section 54 of the CGST Act and Rule 89 of the CGST Rules. The procedure evolved in Circular dated 15.11.2017 cannot operate as delimiting condition on the applicability of statutory provisions.
Karnataka HC ruled that a shareholder (minority or otherwise) can’t initiate proceedings on its own for alleged offence of fraud U/s. 447 of Companies Act, 2013
RKR. Gold P. Ltd Vs ACIT (Madras High Court) The criminal investigation wing is separate and distinct from the assessment wing and disclosure made before one wing will not exonerate the petitioner from the requirement of making a ‘full and true disclosure’ before the assessing officer in assessment. In fact, the apparent difference in the […]
Godrej And Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs State of U.P (Allahabad High Court) 1. In all these writ petitions seizure orders and notices issued under sections 129 (1) and (3), respectively, by various authorities, mainly on the ground that E-Way Bill-01 under U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 (hereinafter referred to as U.P.G.S.T ACT) […]
