Bombay High Court held that exercising extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India not justified as alternate and efficacious remedy already available with the petitioner. Hence, writ petition dismissed.
Bombay High Court held that registered person making a zero rated supply under LUT may claim refund of unutilized credit including that of Compensation Cess. Accordingly, refund of compensation cess granted and appeal is accordingly allowed.
Bombay High Court permits K.S. Bilawala to file a revised tax return, ruling that “genuine hardship” under Section 119(2)(b) of the IT Act should be interpreted liberally.
Bombay HC voids reassessment notice, citing lack of proof of undisclosed material facts by Hindustan Lever Ltd.
Bombay High Court held that once search action u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act is the foundation of the case, assessment could be initiated only under section 153A/ 153C. Thus, initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 is liable to be quashed.
Bombay HC directs IT Dept to review H.K. Jewels’ plea on seized gold, citing Section 132(1)(iii) of the IT Act. Petitioners granted time to file representations.
Bombay High Court quashes reassessment notice under Section 148, holding that revisited issues from Section 263 proceedings cannot form the basis for reopening cases.
Bombay HC sets aside IT department’s rejection of a compounding plea due to delay, directing a reconsideration per Supreme Court precedents.
Bombay HC quashes Indusind Media’s reassessment, citing change of opinion and lack of double deduction proof, ruling in favor of the taxpayer.
Bombay HC rejects review petition by Supreme Construction, upholds pre-deposit for appeal, and imposes costs for non-compliance.
