Read the analysis of the Bombay High Court’s judgment in the case of Aurobindo Pharam Limited Vs NYK Theseus. The court distinguishes between commonality or common ownership and the need for deceit or fraud to lift the corporate veil and establish the concept of alter ego.
The Bombay High Court maintained the cancellation of a liquor license post the demise of the license holder, clarifying the rules concerning license transfer to legal heirs or partners.
In the case of Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. vs DCIT, the Bombay High Court examines the requirement of tangible material for reopening an assessment. This analysis explores the claim of deduction on payment made to settle a class action suit and the court’s decision
Read the full text of the judgment/order of the Bombay High Court in the case of Oerlikon Balzers Coating India Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India. The court strikes down a condition in DTVSV, benefiting the assessee.
Explore landmark ruling in Citibank N.A Vs S.K. Ojha case by Bombay High Court, confirming that post-Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme determination, the Assessing Officer lacks jurisdiction to reopen tax assessments under Section 143 of Income Tax Act. Unearth key insights from this case setting a precedent for businesses under KVSS.
Bombay High Court held that mere filing of an application under section 7(1) of the IB Code is not enough to invoke the bar of section 238 of the IB Code.
In present facts of the case, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court have held that Section 27 (3) expressly states that an obligation of a limited liability partnership, whether arising in contract or otherwise, shall be solely the obligation of the limited liability partnership.
Delve into the recent ruling by the Bombay High Court on the maintainability of a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Bombay High Court resolves Tru-Sprag Freewheels Pvt Ltd vs. Union of India case, directing customs and DGFT to rectify exporters’ procedural errors, ensuring EPCG Scheme benefits. The court’s intervention leads to systemic improvements and the petitioner’s issue resolution.
Bombay High Court held that it is settled principle that for the mistake on the part of the professionals, the litigant should not suffer. Accordingly, condonation of delay of 36 days in filing of return of income granted.
