Section 56 of the U.P. VAT Act would reveal that the section has wide power, but seeking of permission by the assessing authority for making reassessment of the dealer is not conferred under the said provision.
Premium Traders Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) It is admitted case of the respondents that the invoice accompanied with the goods in question was issued by the petitioner. Therefore, the respondent no.3 has committed a manifest error of law not to afford any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner despite persuasion made by […]
Jitendra Singh Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) On merits, it has been submitted, no liability of GST may arise on payment of royalty to conduct mining activity. Reliance has been placed on a an interim order dated 15.11.2021 of this Court passed by a division bench in Writ Tax No. 475 of 2021 […]
Unique Engineers Vs Commissioner Commercial Tax Lko (Allahabad High Court) Admittedly, the revisionist manufactured ‘AT-PLAST’ which are being used in mixing of ready mix concrete / concrete and it has been averred by the revisionist that the said product are being used along with concrete for reducing the uses of water, delay the time of […]
HC direct the respondents to maintain judicial discipline and follow the doctrine of binding precedent and be careful in future, having due regard to the authorities of the Court, keeping in mind the judicial propriety and discipline.
Uphill Farms Private Limited Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) HC explains principles, powers and limitations on exercise of powers under Section 147/148 by Income Tax Officers/ Authorities under the Income tax Act, 1961, as under:- (a) The assessing officer under Section 147 of the Act, 1961 has the power to re-assess any income which […]
U.P. Cooperative Federation Ltd. Vs Emoployees State Insurance Corporation (Allahabad High Court) In the present case, the demand was raised for an amount of Rs.33,846/- for the employer’s contribution for the employees working in the account section of PCF Press for the period January 1981 to September 1986 and from January 1988 to May 1989. […]
Rohit Surfactants Private Limited Vs Kanodia Salt Company Ltd (Allahabad High Court) In Regu Mahesh (Supra), the Court while dealing with compliance of Rule 15 (2) of Order VI relying upon its earlier judgment in case of A. Sapa Vs. Singora, 1991 (3) SCC 375, held that defect in verification or an affidavit is curable. […]
Allahabad HC reviews Ambuj Foods reassessment notice for AY 2013-14, alleging routing funds as share premium through shell companies.
In our opinion, a petition for direction to State Govt for issuing a notification declaring any monument to be of national importance cannot be issued as it is the matter to be decided by the competent authority under the aforesaid Act.
