Sakeel Father /o Shri Wali Mohammad Vs State Tax Officer (Rajasthan High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGMENT 1. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that show cause notice was issued to the petitioner in terms of Section 129 of the Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax, 2017. However, […]
M/s. Popular Vehicles & Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (Kerala High Court) Sub-clause (va) of Section 36(1) takes care of the employee’s contribution, which stands unaffected by Section 43B as the restriction available in Section 43B is already available under the Explanation to the said clause, with a qualification of the payment being before the […]
a) The respondents State is directed to accept the return of income for the Assessment Year 201819 by the petitioners herein if uploaded on or before 30th June, 2018 without Aadhar number, Aadhar Enrollment or any linkage with the PAN details.
M/s. Agasthiya Holdings Private Limited Vs CIT (Madras High Court) In Tax Recovery Officer Vs. Gangadhar Viswanath Ranade (Decd.,) reported in AIR 1999 SC 427, the scope of Section 281 of the Income Tax Act and Rule 11 of the Second Schedule came up for consideration. The question arose for consideration before the Honourable Supreme […]
Respondent assessee is a private limited company. The business premises of the company was subjected to survey operation under section 133 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act for short). During the survey operation, the Revenue claimed to have seized and impounded a diary which allegedly reveal certain cash transactions with respect to sell of Vatva land. Statement of the directors of the company were also recorded.
Naga Distributors Vs. UOI & Ors. (Kerala High Court) High Court held that If the uploading of FORM GST TRAN-1 is not possible for reasons not attributable to the petitioner, the authority will also enable him to take credit of the input tax available at the time of migration. FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT […]
If the petitioner applies within two weeks after receiving this judgment, the Nodal Officer will consider and take steps within a week thereafter. If the uploading of FORM GST TRAN-1 is not possible for reasons not attributable to the petitioner, the authority will also enable him to take credit of the input tax available at the time of migration.
Dept. t explanation for cancellation of e-suvidha declaration. Appellant replied that the goods being transported were Auto three wheelers fitted with BS III Engines and because sale thereof were prohibited by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court and the goods which were being transported stood reduced to scrap and were not marketable, those were to be returned to be consigner. T
United Bank of India Vs CIT (Calcutta High Court) The present accounting principle being followed by the bank is valuation of the closing stock on cost or market value whichever is lower. They want to apply this principle to the stock in trade acquired in the financial year i.e. 1984-85 prior to the assessment year […]
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Lok Adalat could not have passed the order on merits and should have been referred the case to the Regular Court for adjudication and if the orders are passed thereafter the substantial right of the petitioner would have been affected, therefore, the impugned order dated 09.09.2017 be set aside and the case be referred to the regular Court for decision on merits.
