Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Bombay High Court

AO cannot ask for even 20% of Disputed Tax till disposal of appeal by CIT-A

October 28, 2018 18357 Views 0 comment Print

Bhupendra Murji Shah Vs. DCIT (Bombay High Court) We are not concerned here with the Circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes. We are not concerned here also with the power conferred in the Assessing Officer of collection and recovery by coercive means. All that we are worried about is the understanding of this […]

IGST Refund: HC allows modifications in GSTR-1 & GSTR-3B

October 22, 2018 3909 Views 0 comment Print

Star Rays Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks a refund of integrated goods and service tax paid in respect of the goods which have been exported. The refund short is aggregates to an amount of Rs.8.42 crores and covers the period from […]

Advocate cannot seek Salary details of client’s Husband under RTI

October 22, 2018 2994 Views 0 comment Print

Rajesh Ramchandra Kidile Vs Maharashtra State Information (Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench) Perusal of this application shows that the salary slips for the period mentioned in the application have been sought for by the Advocate. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the salary slips contain such details as deductions made from […]

Penalty cannot be levied if claim was as per judicial precedents

October 21, 2018 3036 Views 0 comment Print

PCIT Vs. Dhariwal Industries Ltd (Bombay High Court) Mr Tejveer Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue, relied upon a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Principal CIT-2 v/s Shree Gopal Housing and Plantation Corporation, Mumbai in Income Tax Appeal No.701 of 2015 decided on 6th February, […]

Allow manual filing of revised TRAN-1, ITC-01 & GSTR-3B: HC

October 19, 2018 5040 Views 0 comment Print

Indusind Media Communications Ltd. and Anr. Vs Union Of India (Bombay High Court) In view of the above, the undisputed position before us is that the Petitioners are entitled to distribute the Input Credit available with it as on 1st July 2017 amongst its branches/locations. This distribution has not been possible on account of technical problems of the Respondents. Further the […]

File tax appeals before the bench allotted to district where dispute arose

October 19, 2018 519 Views 0 comment Print

Dixons Cargo Consolidators Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Customs (High Court Bombay) The impugned orders passed by the Tribunal in excise appeals before us relate to and arise out of disputes relating to manufacture of excisable goods which have taken place at Nagpur. Therefore, the Excise Appeal Nos. 28 of 2017 and 105 of 2017 before […]

Goods cannot be treated as Smuggled for mere non-maintenance of books

October 16, 2018 4587 Views 0 comment Print

UOI Vs Imtiaz Iqbal Pothiwala (Bombay High Court) We are of the view that in the absence of evidence in the form of regular Books of Account, Registration under the Income Tax and Sales Tax, etc., cannot ispo­facto lead to the conclusion that the seized gold bars, are smuggled gold bars. These may lead to proceedings for […]

Disallowance of Service Tax U/s. 43B when payment not received from customer

October 7, 2018 7599 Views 0 comment Print

Service tax due not disallowed under section 43 if payment not received from the customer

Error in filing Form TRAN­1- Govt should allow rectification: HC

October 5, 2018 1254 Views 0 comment Print

O/E/N India Ltd. & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Bombay High Court) 1. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks a direction to the Respondent No. 3 to allow the Petitioners to resubmit his Form TRAN­1 either electronically or physically, containing the correct figure of Cenvat credit available to the Petitioners under the Central Goods and Services […]

Assessment cannot be reopened (within 4 years) for oversight of a statutory provision by AO

October 5, 2018 2469 Views 0 comment Print

PCIT Vs Inarco Limited (Bombay High Court) The grievance of the Revenue before us is that the Assessing Officer omitted to consider Section 50C of the Act while passing the order dated 26.12.2007 under Section 143(3) of the Act. Thus, it is submitted that the re­opening notice dated 11.3.2010 is valid in law. In this […]

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031