Karnataka High Court held that National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) is a surcharge and can be levied even in absence of levy of excise duty.
Since the impugned order of rejecting the refund claim was passed on 23.11.2020 and this Circular came to be issued on 25.09.2021 giving a clarification as to the date for claiming refund under Section 89 of the CGST Act, and Section 19 of the IGST Act, 2017, therefore, the matter was remanded back to the authority to deal with the refund application in the light of the Circular No.162/18/2021-GST dated 25.09.2021, issued more particularly with regard to the applicability of the Circular issued by the Government, and then pass orders in accordance with law.
Sigma Construction Co. Vs UOI (Madhya Pradesh High Court) The issue whether in cases when tax dues have been paid in full, are eligible under SVLDRS, 2019 for waiver of interest or not. Hon’ble High Court directed CBIC to dwell upon the question and issue a clarificatory circular/instruction so that ambiguity prevailing in the field […]
Shree Hari Printers Vs Commissioner, Commercial Taxes & GST (Orissa High Court) HC issued direction to the department for opening of GST portal for payment of tax and other dues and to enable filing of GST returns so as to consider application for revocation of cancelled GST registration of the petitioner. FULL TEXT OF THE […]
Karnataka High Court held that once an account is declared to be a fraud, bank can initiate criminal proceedings even after initiation of proceedings under SARFAESI Act and having a recovery certificate
Calcutta High Court held that an arbitrator cannot shun away his responsibilities and leave the work of quantification of awarded interest on chartered accountant. Accordingly, held that arbitration award suffers infirmity.
Sheetal Dilip Jain Vs State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Bombay High Court) Bombay High Court held that minimum 30 days time should be granted to file reply in all cases of issuance of SCN under Section 73 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It will equally apply to Section 73 and 74 […]
Section 30 of the Advocates’ Act confers the right on the Advocates to practice. The same does not confer any right on any advocate to park his/her vehicle inside Court premises. There is no element of public interest involved in this petition. The petition is misconceived. In the result, the same is dismissed.
Keshav Kanshkar A Class Electrical Contractor Vs Principal Secretary Department of Energy (Madhya Pradesh High Court) ‘Precedent’, refers to a court decision that is considered as authority for deciding subsequent cases involving identical or similar facts, or similar issues. ‘Precedent’, is incorporated into the doctrine of ‘stare decisis’, and requires courts to apply the law […]
Liability of a partner for acts of the firm. Every partner is liable, jointly with all the other partners and also severally, for all acts of the firm done while he is a partner.
