Euro Pratik LE vs UOI (Bombay High Court ) Case Summary The Petitioner is a wholesaler, importer and distributor of decorative sheets, which are used for furniture manufacturing. The petitioner was not registered under central laws in Pre-GST regime. As per section 140(3) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (‘CGST Act’) r.w. […]
Kerala High Court has held that penalty cannot be imposed for not producing the goods (before the officer) after release on bond, when there is a security equivalent to value of goods which could be invoked. It noted that there was no question of tax and penalty being not paid as bank guarantee could be invoked at any time.
CIT Vs M/S. JRD Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd (Delhi High Court) The peak credit worked out by the Assessee was on the basis that the principle of peak credit would apply, notwithstanding the failure of the Assessee to explain each of the sources of the deposits and the corresponding destination of the payment without squaring […]
The Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs M/s Khush Bhakht Electronic Engineers Pvt.Ltd. (Bombay High Court) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and on a true and correct interpretation of schedule entries C-II-124 and C-II-126, appended to the Bombay Sales Tax Act 1959, the Tribunal was legally justified in holding the impugned product […]
As the complete details to be filled up in Part-B of the E-way Bill were supplied on 25.05.2018, the goods were not liable for seizure on 26.05.2018.
Mathumitha Ramesh Vs The Chief Health Officer (Madras High Court) In the present case, the hospital in which the petitioner had given birth to a child had certified that the petitioner herein had delivered an alive girl on 23.04.2017 at 10.47 a.m. at Cethar Hospital, Trichy. The petitioner herein had also filed an affidavit before the authorities that the child was born from her womb. In the affidavit filed before this Court, the petitioner had clearly stated that she got pregnant through “intrauterine insemination” through which, she delivered […]
Kalanithi Maran Vs. UOI (Madras High Court) In the absence of any material, 2nd respondent should not have come to conclusion that assessee was Principal Officer. Unless the 2nd respondent makes out a prima facie case against petitioner of his liability and obligation as Principal Officer in day-to-day affairs of the company as Chairman-cum-Managing Director […]
Sitaram Ramchanddas Patel Vs ITO (Gujarat High Court) When the assessee failed to prove the capacity of the concerned persons who alleged to have given the unsecured loan and/or gift, it cannot be said that the learned Tribunal has committed any error in confirming the additions made by the Assessing officer and confirmed by the […]
Pr. CIT Vs M/s Nawany Construction Co. Pvt Ltd (Bombay High Court) Section 260A Low Tax Effect Circular– Department has made an attempt to get over the binding Circulars and in any case we shall not allow the Revenue to get over them in this manner. The Circulars continue to bind the Revenue and if they contain any conditions, whether […]
Pr. CIT Vs. Vijay Infrastructure Ltd. (Allahabad High Court) Since the time limit for filing the revised return had not expired during the relevant year, therefore, claim for deduction under section 80-IA if not made earlier could have been made in the revised return. Once it could have been claimed in the revised return under […]
