Incorrectly mentioning the number of tax invoices as tax invoice number on E-way Bill- Prima facie, there seems no discrepancy in E-way Bill attracting seizure of goods. Goods directed to be released without insisting for a deposit of any amount and furnishing security as GST already paid on goods.
Lucknow CA Tax Practitioners Association VS. UOI (Allahabad High Court) As far as prayer no.1 of the petitioner-association for issuance of a mandamus to the respondents to extend the “Due Date” of filing of Income Tax Return of Tax Audit Cases from 15.10.2018 to at least up to 31.10.2018 or such other date is concerned, […]
Rajesh Sharma Vs State of U.P. & Anr. (Allahabad High Court) In this case The petitioiner was aggreived by an order passed by the District Magistrate under the U.P. Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1979, which has been repealed by the GST Act on 1-7-2017. Hon’ble High Court directed peitioner to approach the appropriate authorty […]
Ranjeet @ Ranjeet Singh Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) Supplementary counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the complainant today in the Court is taken on record. Heard Sri Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.K.Singh Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. […]
Vikram Singh Vs CIT (Allahabad High Court) The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant-assessee is that the notice was not issued with the prior sanction of the Joint Commissioner, but sanction was accorded by the Additional Commissioner and, therefore, notice under Section 148 of the Act issued by the A.O. was […]
Sri Mathur has placed before us an order under Section 119 whereby the due date has already been extended by this order till 15th October, 2018. In view of the above, it appears that the matter has become infructuous as it has lost its efficacy.
Swapnil Kumar Vs C.S.C. (Allahabad High Court) It is important to mention here that CIT(A), after considering the report submitted by the A.O. in response to the directions under Section 250(4) of the Act, had held that the assessee was not residing at 109, North Idgah Colony, Agra and he had left the address two […]
Union Of India Vs The Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow (Allahabad High Court) In the present case it is an admitted fact that the revisionist disputed the liability of payment of tax and that the revisionist never admitted liability to pay any tax on the transaction in question and this fact that the revisionist is […]
The submission of Sri Vishwjit, learned counsel for the petitioners is that the seizure is on account of non filing Part-B of E-way Bill. Part-B of E-Way Bill requires the details of the vehicle carrying the goods and the destination.
Bengali Lal & Sons Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri R.C. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondents no. 5 and 6 as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents no. 1 to 4. The petitioner is a partnership firm and had applied for registration under […]
