Raja Ram Dalmia Vs CIT (Calcutta High Court) HC held that Without going into these disputed facts that whether claim was lodged before the Official Liquidator, admitted position today which exists on the basis of report of the Official Liquidator is that even if the respondent Income Tax Authority wants to recover the demand from […]
Ramesh Arora (Earlier Known As Ramesh Kumar) Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) Learned counsel for the parties admit that as the impugned notices in the present matters have been issued post 31st March, 2021 without following the procedure prescribed in the substituted Sections 147 to 151 w.e.f. 01st April, 2021, the present matters are covered […]
Unisource Hydro Carbon Services Private Limited & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Calcutta High Court) The Hon’ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And The Hon’ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, passed judgement on 22.04.2022 and 02.05.2022 and allowed the Writ petition and set aside the order of the Learned Single Judge passed by the Hon’ble Justice Nizamuddin […]
Reopening of assessment u/s. 147 and issuance of notices u/s. 148 admittedly after expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year on the selfsame material facts which were already available before the assessing officer at the time of regular assessment and without recording of any omission or failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly any material fact necessary for assessment before the assessing officer in course of regular assessment proceeding.
Assessee who is deprived of refund of their amount in view of wrongful withholding of their amount by the authority cannot be refused to compensate for such wrongful deprivation of their amount lying with the authority for no fault of the assessees. We are inclined to allow the claim for the interest by way of compensation/damages at the rate of 6% p.a. for delayed period.
Vridhi Iron Steels Vs Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (Guwahati High Court) Facts- The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner is a consumer of electricity having authorized connected load of 1105KW = 1300KVA and contracted demand of 1001 KVA. On 9/10/2018, a technical inspection of the petitioner’s electrical installation was undertaken and […]
U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. Vs Emoployees State Insurance Corporation (Allahabad High Court) In the present case, the demand was raised for an amount of Rs.33,846/- for the employer’s contribution for the employees working in the account section of PCF Press for the period January 1981 to September 1986 and from January 1988 to May 1989. […]
State of Tamil Nadu Vs Everest Industries Limited (Madras High Court) It is useful to refer to the Judgment of the Apex Court in A. Venkata Subbarao v. State of A.P., (1965) 2 SCR 577 : AIR 1965 SC 1773 while dealing with the claims relating to tax that was illegally retained. In the above […]
We are of the view that both the appellate authority as well as the revisional authority were not justified in out-rightly rejecting the prayer for stay of the petitioner. Power to entertain prayer for stay is incidental and ancillary to the power to hear appeal and revision.
In the context of Export Import Policy 2002-07 it was held that the policy could not have been retrospectively amended by the Government without there being any express power in this regard and that in any case the retrospective amendment of policy cannot take away vested rights of the exporters.
