Sikka Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner, Central Goods And Service Tax & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Learned counsel for the Petitioner points out that in the present case, the eligibility of the Petitioner to claim ITC has not been doubted by the Respondents. However, for no fault of the Petitioner, despite filing the form GST […]
Manglesh Champaklal Gandhi Vs Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. (Gujarat High Court) It is clear that on reading the provisions of Section 13(4) of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 with Rule 8 of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, the Court held that once possession notice is given under […]
CIT Vs M/s. Vaani Estates Pvt. Ltd. (Madras High Court) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid provisions, we are of the opinion that the learned Assessing authority was required to undertake the exercise of fact finding by determining the Fair Market Value of the Shares in question as required […]
Section 45(4) would not be attracted on the retirement of the two partners and consequential allotment of their share in the assets in the assessee-firm as there was no element of transfer of interest in the partnership assets by the retiring partner to the continuing partners.
Jakap Metind Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) In this case, it is not as if the petitioner has not filed FORM GST TRAN-1 within the time provided by the respondents under the rules. The petitioner had filed the form, but on account of not properly understanding the nature of the columns […]
Smt. Krishana Kumari Devi Vs Harihar Chandra Bhanjdeo (Chhattisgarh High Court) It is, indisputably and fairly well settled that private was to remain with him under the covenant/agreement executed with the GOI and the said property has to pass on from one Ruler to another in terms of Article 5 of the agreement. It would […]
Chogori India Retail Ltd Vs Union of India And Ors. (Delhi High Court) This Court would not like to get into the issue whether in fact the Petitioner faced difficulty. The transitional credit (TC) available in the account of the Petitioner is a substantial sum. It is not denied by the Respondent that the Petitioner […]
Since AO had purported to assume the jurisdiction for reopening of assessment, without having first disposed of assessees objections to the reasons by passing a speaking order, therefore, failure to follow the procedure renders the assumption of jurisdiction by AO ultra vires in law.
Order of attachment of bank account is prima facie without authority of law, as discussed hereinabove, and the order of blocking of credit is not backed by any statutory provision, the respondents are directed to forthwith withdraw the attachment of the bank account of the petitioner with the IDBI Bank, Prahladnagar Branch bearing Current Account No. 1024102000009874 and to unblock the credit of Rs.6,63,51,380/- available in the electronic credit ledger forthwith.
Himani Munjal Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court) Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking regular bail in Criminal Complaint No. 35/2018 pending before the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, (Economic Offences) Jaipur Mahanagar, for offences under Sections 132(1)(b),(c)(d),(f),(i) and (1) of Central Goods and Services Tax […]
