The Calcutta High Court held that reassessment notices for AY 2015-16 issued after the amended limitation period under Section 149 were without jurisdiction. The Court ruled that the extended ten-year period could not apply without material showing escaped income exceeding Rs. 50 lakh.
The Court ruled that consistency in tax litigation presupposes an informed and deliberate decision by authorities. Mere failure to raise an issue in one year due to oversight does not bar future appeals.
The Delhi High Court held that duty drawback accrues only upon passing of the order by the competent authority and not merely in the year of export.
The Bombay High Court held that a provisional attachment of a bank account under Section 83(2) of the CGST Act automatically ceases after one year. The Court directed de-freezing of the account, ruling that the attachment had lapsed by operation of law.
The Court held that shareholder resolutions seeking removal of directors under Section 284 are independent of Section 188 requirements relating to circulation of members’ resolutions.
The Delhi High Court upheld restraint on a company’s move to remove a director because the special notice only made vague allegations without disclosing particulars. The Court held that statutory rights under Section 169 require meaningful grounds and opportunity of representation.
The Bombay High Court held that statements made in Special Notices for removal of a director under the Companies Act formed part of a statutory corporate process and were not per se defamatory.
AO observed an imbalance: the investor companies brought in massive investments but received a minimal percentage of equity, while the promoters retained overwhelming majority control despite investing a lower proportionate amount (Rs. 45 crores)
The Court held that a shareholder holding requisite voting strength has a statutory right under Section 169 to convene an extraordinary general meeting if the board fails to act.
The High Court reiterated that separate assessment orders are required for separate financial years under Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act. The combined order for 2018-19 and 2019-20 was quashed.
