Read about the court’s inquiry order in Ansari Construction vs Additional Commissioner GST (Appeals) case. System responsibility for harassment, liability fixation awaited
Sahara Hospitality Limited Vs State Of Maharashtra And Others (Bombay High Court) Heard Mr. Gautam Ankhad, learned counsel along with Mr. Patkar, learned counsel for the petitioner; and Ms. Chavan, learned AGP for the respondents. 2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has assailed legality and validity of […]
Sanjeev Mishra Vs Disciplinary Authority (Rajasthan High Court) In the present digital world, work place for employees working in the Bank and who have earlier worked in the same Branch and later on shifted to different branches which may be situated in different States has to be treated completely as one work place on a […]
Bliss Abode Pvt Ltd Vs Zonal Office Directorate of Enforcement & Ors (Delhi High Court) The Delhi High Court directed that n order to avoid a dispute in future and to ensure fairness and non-arbitrariness, the Registrar of the Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA shall ensure that in future, all orders passed by the Adjudicating […]
Delhi High Court grants extension to poppy seed importers affected by COVID-19. Importers get two months to complete imports. Impugned order quashed.
All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) High Court held that respondent No.1 – Union of India, Ministry of Finance should immediately look into the issue, more particularly, the representation dated 12th October 2020 at Annexure : I of the paper book (page 108) and take an appropriate decision […]
Present writ petition has been filed seeking a declaration that Sections 69 and 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 are arbitrary, unreasonable and being beyond the legislative competence of the Parliament are ultra vires the Constitution. Held by High COurt This Court has refused to pass any interim order holding that it is not inclined […]
ust as in the case of civil actions the claim was not to be brought after the expiration of a specified number of years from the date on which the cause of action accrued, so in the case of arbitrations, the claim was not to be put forward after the expiration of the specified number of years from the date when the claim accrued. The period of limitation for making claims by BBMP by way of a suit or arbitration was six years from the date when the cause of action arose.
Kunal Bahl Vs State of Karnataka (Karnataka High Court) In E-commerce transactions the jurisdiction to try offences will lie with a Court where the accused has its Head Office, Branch Office or other offices. 1. The order of Cognisance dated 8.6.2020 is not in compliance with the requirement of Section 191(1)( a) of the Cr.P.C […]
M/s. Sri Gopikrishna Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd Vs State of Tripura and Ors (Tripura High Court) Quantum of penalty for transportation the taxable goods without the cover of valid e-way bill Learned counsel has fairly stated that only violation that has been noticed by the taxing authority is of not carrying the valid e-way bill against the […]
