Sirpur Paper Mills Limited Vs Union of India (Telangana High Court) Insofar carry forward of losses and adjustments against future profits are concerned, the same is provided by Clause 17.7 (c) of the resolution plan. However, as and when such carry forward and set off is claimed by the petitioner in future, i.e. beyond the […]
Colgate Global Business Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) A Perusal of the impugned Order indicates that the Respondent No.3 has rejected the application for refund without recording any reasons, though the same is mandatory under Rule 92(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. In our view, the […]
In view of absence of documentary evidence, and the findings and discussion hereinabove, the Petitioner cannot be granted MEIS benefit merely on the basis of pleadings which are prima facie insufficient on the face of record. Hence the Petition must fail.
Shekar B.S. Vs Chief General Manager, Syndicate Bank (Karnataka High Court) Bank’s justification is, petitioner has not opted for switchover to a new system. The fact remains that bank has reduced the rate of interest from 11.75% to 8.25% with effect from 24.01.2017. It is a housing loan. The stand taken by the bank that […]
Kamalesh Sen Vs Assistant State Tax Officer (Kerala High Court) It is noticed from Ext.P8, that the respondent has given a reason for initiating proceedings under Section 130. The correctness or otherwise of the said reason is not a matter which can be considered by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, […]
Parinee Realty Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) According to the JAO, survey report submitted by DDIT investigation indicate that interest should be charged at 12% per annum on loan given to sister concern totaling to Rs.4,17,04,380/- and therefore income chargeable to tax has been under assessed by the said amount. According to the […]
C. Joseph Vijay Vs State of Tamil Nadu (Madras High Court) HC held that it is difficult to suggest that the petitioner had acted with malafide and with deliberate intention and thus, the observation made by the learned single Judge, apart from being unwarranted, are irrelevant to decide the issue. The order of the writ […]
Haldia Steels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Calcutta High Court) In this matter the petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment order dated 28th September, 2021, under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice by not serving copy of the draft […]
High Court has held that the service tax paid on re-insurance would be allowable as input service under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
Twin Disc Power Transmission Pvt. Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner (ST), GST – Appeals (Madras High Court) Whether in some extraordinary or exceptional circumstance, a GST refund application can be permitted to be filed manually? He held that in some extraordinary or exceptional circumstance, a refund application can be permitted to be filed manually and such […]
