Sponsored
    Follow Us:

All High Courts

Assessment with notice u/s 143(2) prior to filing of return of income is invalid

July 27, 2019 2676 Views 0 comment Print

Notice under section 143(2) was issued prior to the filing of the return of income which was invalid and the assessment order passed would also be invalid.

HC allowed dept to conduct Service Tax Audit post GST implementation

July 27, 2019 3108 Views 0 comment Print

Ess Infraproject Private Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) The issue of the saving of Rule 5A(2) of Service Tax Rules, 1992 on introduction of CGST Act, 2017 is an issue that requires detailed consideration. This would be appropriately done at the final hearing. Thus, granting of interim relief at this stage would […]

AO has a legal obligation to implement order of ITAT strictly: HC

July 25, 2019 3147 Views 0 comment Print

Lokesh Chandrappa Vs ITO (Karnataka High Court) It is trite law that the Assessing Officer has a legal obligation to implement the order of the ITAT strictly and such failure would result in the failure of justice. A writ of mandamus would be issued in such circumstances to the respondent – Assessing Officer to carry […]

Delhi HC explains period for which Interest on VAT Refund Payable

July 25, 2019 5058 Views 0 comment Print

Corsan Corviam Construccion S.A.- Sadhbhav Engineering Ltd. JV Vs Commissioner of Trade & Taxes (Delhi High Court) The wording of Section 42(1) of DVAT Act is unambiguous. It talks of the two dates i.e. date the refund was due to be paid to the person and ‘until the date’ on which the refund is ‘given’. […]

Effective date of STP approval cannot be amended to an earlier point of time, once imports made

July 24, 2019 648 Views 0 comment Print

Khivraj Tech Park Pvt Ltd. Vs Union of India (Madras High Court) The petitioner was granted permission for setting up a ‘Software Technology Park’ and a communication dated 29-11-2005 was sent by the Ministry. Since their imports had already arrived during October-November 2005, an amendment of the effective date of approval to 4-4-2005 was sought, […]

No Regular bail under GST to accused in bogus bill case

July 24, 2019 789 Views 0 comment Print

Vikas Goel Vs Deputy Director, Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence (Punjab and Haryana HC) Petitioner has filed this second petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in a complaint case bearing No.COMA-137 dated 13.11.2018, titled as ‘Shankar Prasad Sarma Versus MICA Industries and […]

Unaccounted goods at disclosed place of business are ‘secreted’

July 22, 2019 4305 Views 0 comment Print

Rajeev Traders Vs State Of U. P. (Allahabad High Court) Allahabad High Court held that once it was admitted that assessee had not recorded goods found stored at his disclosed place of business, in his books of account, a presumption of goods having been ‘secreted’ as per CGST Section 67 did arise. Upholding seizure of […]

Show cause notice is sine qua non to proceed with recovery under GST

July 22, 2019 5841 Views 0 comment Print

LC Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Karnataka High Court) Section 73 of the Chapter XV of the Act – contemplates that where it appears to the proper officer that any tax has not been paid or short paid or erroneously refunded, or where input tax credit has been wrongly availed or utilised […]

No Professional misconduct if auditor not obtains NOC from auditor prior to existing auditor

July 22, 2019 19158 Views 0 comment Print

Ssay & Associates Vs ICAI (Delhi High Court) Conclusion: Since the accounts filed with the Registrar of Companies for the years 2006-07 to 2008-09, that is, for the three years prior to the period for which KNA was appointed, had been audited by M/s Manu Sharma and Co. and therefore, there was no necessity for […]

No VAT liability on transporter even when consignor and consignee details not given

July 22, 2019 891 Views 0 comment Print

Allahabad High Court has held that tax liability cannot be fixed on the transporter merely because the assessee/transporter did not furnish the details of the consignor and the consignee of the completed transactions.

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031