Southern Railways had to pay the GST Tax with reference to the license fee collected from the contractors and the contractors were liable to pay the service tax with reference to the parking fee collected from the customers, who all were end users.
High Court quashed the order passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) imposing royalty taxation for ‘Adwords program’ as the material on the basis of which the order had been passed by Tribunal was not furnished to the appellant at any point time, the order passed by the Tribunal was certainly violative of principles of natural justice and fair play as the appellant was not afforded an opportunity to rebut fresh evidence especially when such evidence was based on Google study.
Recovery can only be made against deductor who is the assessee in default, to the extent tax was deducted by the deductor and not remitted to the Income-tax Department. To the extent tax was deducted by the second respondent and not remitted by the second respondent to the Income Tax Department, recovery can be only directed against the second respondent as the second respondent is the assessee in default. The petitioner cannot be made to pay tax twice. Recovery of any of such Tax Deducted at Source but not remitted by the second respondent has to be recovered only from the second respondent .
P. Radhakrishnan vs State Of Kerala (Kerala High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER of KERALA HIGH COURT W.P(C).No.7641 of 2021 The instant writ petition is filed by the Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate, Kochi Zonal Office, aggrieved by the registration of Exhibit P1 FIR by the Crime Branch wing of the State Police. The essential facts […]
Deific Abode LLP Vs Union of India (Calcutta High Court) The fundamental point of contention, as advanced by Mr. Khaitan, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, is the unconscionable and illegal ‘retrospective applicability’ of the 1988 Act, leading to these proceedings. When the matter was last taken up, Mr. Khaitan had conspicuously […]
Raj Arivazhagan Vs ITO (Madras High Court) In the case on hand, the petitioner had raised a specific objection that the proposal for reopening the assessment is liable to be dropped, since there is no finding that there was escapement of income. It was further contended that for the purpose of carrying on verification exercise, […]
High Court on its own motion Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Bombay High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER of BOMBAY HIGH COURT This Suo Motu Public Interest Litigation is initiated Re: the rise in COVID-19 Virus cases in March-April 2021 in the prisons in the State of Maharashtra. 2. Newspaper reports, more particularly, […]
In re Court On Its Own Motion (Bombay High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER of BOMBAY HIGH COURT The second wave of the pandemic, arising out of COVID-19 virus, has been wreaking havoc just as the first wave did in the year that went by. To combat the rising second wave, the Government of Maharashtra […]
Back Office It Solutions Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi high Court) We are of the view that the contesting respondents were mandatorily required to have a pre-show cause notice consultation with the petitioner-company and that having not being done in the instant matter, the proceedings initiated by the contesting respondents via […]
Since there was a variation made to the declared income of the petitioner qua the assessment year 2018-2019, a show-cause notice should have been issued, before finalizing the variation.
