S.J.Suryah (a.k.a. S.Justin Selvaraj) Vs S. S. Chakravarthy (Madras High Court) Facts- According to appellant, the credit for the story, screenplay and dialogue pertaining to the film ‘Vaalee’ was given to him. The appellant argued that the Trial Court had erred in granting interim injunction, merely because the Petitioner could not produce the written agreement […]
Since no discrepancy had been found with regard to the suppliers of assessee, the refund claim by assessee could not be denied to be processed on the ground that verification of the suppliers of assessee’s supplier was pending as the provisions of the CGST Act and the IGST Act did not mandate refund claimant to verify the genuineness of the suppliers of its supplier, inasmuch as enough safeguards/mechanism were provided under the Act to recover the taxes, if not paid or wrong credit was availed by assessee’s supplier or supplier’s supplier.
CIGFIL Retail Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Calcutta High Court) HC held that it is not a case of tax evasion or causing revenue loss to the Government rather petitioner’s activity of carrying on the business which cannot be called illegal is creating revenue for the State as well as in helping the State […]
Unifab Engineering Project Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs Deputy Commissioner CGST And CEX (Bombay High Court) 1. A show cause-cum-demand notice dated July 29, 2021 issued by the Deputy Commissioner CGST & CEX, respondent no.1, is under challenge in this writ petition. By the impugned notice, explanation has been called for from the petitioners as […]
PCIT Vs Vaidya Panalalmanilal (HUF) (Gujarat High Court) The materials on record would suggest that there was no dispute at the hands of the Revenue that the sale consideration arising out of the sale of the capital asset was used for acquisition of a new asset and that such newly acquired asset was also shown […]
Dheeraj Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand (Jharkhand High Court) Since the decision has been taken by the competent authority as under Section 18(3) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 relaxing the outdoor congregation for conducting the T-20 International Cricket Match as has been submitted by Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the JSCA that […]
Parag Kishorchandra Shah Vs The National Faceless Assessment Center & Ors. (Bombay High Court) HC held direction needs to be issued to the Assessing Officer to pay costs to bring judicious approach amongst Assessing Officers for effective implementation of faceless assessment in its letter and spirit. The Assessing Officer should have been aware of the […]
PCIT Vs Shailja Pasricha (Delhi High Court) Assessing Officer had in fact invoked Section 50C of the Act claiming that the sale consideration of Rs. 18 Crores received by the respondent was below the Circle Rate. This was clearly ignoring the fact that the sale consideration was in fact Rs. 35 Crores. The CIT(A) and […]
Summons issued under section 50(2) of the Act has nothing to do with the regulations as defined under the Regulatory Rules. The rules are referable only to proceedings for adjudication and not to pre-adjudication proceedings. In fact, section 50(2) does not refer to an accused at all.
PCIT Vs Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank (Calcutta High Court) The short issue which falls for consideration is whether the exercise of jurisdiction by the Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (Kolkata) (CIT) under Section 263 of the Act was just and proper. The Tribunal considered the factual position and noted that the CIT was of the opinion […]
