Yogesh Waman Athavale Vs Vikram Abasaheb Jadhav (Bombay High Court) 1. The petitioner, by way of filing the present petition prays for initiating contempt proceedings against respondent No.1, who is Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chiplun, District Ratnagiri, for allegedly disregarding the binding precedents of the Superior Courts. 2. The petitioner, […]
Kaveri Home Needs Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court) Considering the fact that the petitioner has shown scant regards of the assessment proceedings under the TNVAT Act, 2006, I do not find any merits in the present writ petition. Further, this writ petition has been filed for an order which came to be passed […]
Dr. Surendra Manjrekar Vs State of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court) IN this case F.I.R. itself shows that the deceased was taking treatment for his stress management. He was disturbed and in the disturbed state of mind he had committed suicide. So, there is possibility that his commission of suicide was a result of his mental […]
Meghalaya High Court held that State had no authority to impose cess in terms of the Meghalaya Cement Cess Act, 2010 and by annulling the Act as ultra vires the Constitution and requiring the State to refund 20 percent of the amount realized on such count from the individual petitioners to such petitioners
Petitioner would like to press for grant of interest as ITC under Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 could have been blocked only for a period of one year. He emphasises that in the present case the blocking has been done for two years.
Balkrishna Industries Ltd. Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court) It appears quite undisputable that the petitioner had availed the facility of importing goods under advance licences without payment of duty. In some cases such advance licence were invalidated in order to procure raw material duty free from local manufacturers. Raw materials so procured were […]
NCLT Order accepting IBA Application for want of Jurisdiction post-amendment to Section 4 was quashed in the light of amendment to section 4 wherein Part II of the IBC could apply only to matters relating to insolvency and liquidation of corporate debtors, where the minimum amount of default was Rs.1 Crore.
Google Asia Pacific Pte Ltd Vs CIT (Delhi High Court) Learned counsel for the Petitioner has pointed out that withholding the rate of 10% as prescribed under the DTAA is inclusive of the applicable surcharge and cess and therefore no additional surcharge or cess is required to be imposed. This position, he submits is settled […]
CIT Vs Ramdoot Prasad Sewa Samiti (Rajasthan High Court) brief facts are that respondent-assessee is a trust registered under Section 12AA of the Act and had claimed exemption under the Act for assessment year 2012-13. The return filed by the assessee-trust was taken under scrutiny by the assessing officer. During such assessment the assessing officer […]
Polu Venkata Lakshmamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Pradesh High Court) Once there is a failure of rules of natural justice, even if there is an alternative remedy, a writ is maintainable. The law is well settled. Hence, the impugned order, dated 22.12.2020 as communicated by the endorsement dated 14.12.2021 is hereby set […]
