Sharvah Multitrade Company Private Limited Vs ITO (Bombay High Court) Bombay High Court on non application of mind by AO while recording reasons as well as by PCIT while granting approval. Passes severe strictures against AO who recorded reasons for reopening, JCIT who recommended for approval and PCIT who granted approval. High Court Asks CBDT […]
Update on 06.01.2022 at 11 PM Matter was listed today for hearing. Advocate (Dr.) Avinash Poddar along with Advocate Nipun Singhvi appeared in the matter and argued the matter. On hearing Dr. Poddar, Hon’ble Court was pleased to issued notice to Union and CBDT. Now the matter is scheduled to get listed for further hearing […]
Svitzer Hazira Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (Bombay High Court) In the facts of the present case, it is clear from the digital signature on the notice issued by Respondent No.1 that the notice was issued at 2.40 p.m. on 31/03/2019. The sanction by the authority under Section 151 was digitally signed at 2.55 p.m. on […]
Commissioner of Customs (Export) Vs Reliance Industries Limited (Bombay High Court) The proper officer, to whom power is conferred by Section 28 of the said Act and other related provisions would necessarily mean the proper officer, who in the first instance, assessed and cleared the goods, i.e., Apprising Officer of Air Cargo Complex. Therefore, the […]
HC held that Cenvat Credit not eligible on facility of transportation provided by the appellant to its employees as same was merely in the nature of service for personal use or consumption of its employees.
Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (Bombay High Court) In our view, any decision on the issue whether the revenue could have invoked the extended period of limitation for recovery of the excise duty, or would not have any bearing or impact on the rate of duty of excise or […]
Reliance Industries Limited Vs CCIT (Bombay High Court) Respondent no.1, by letter dated 21st October 2020, replied to petitioner’s application dated 15th April 2020 that petitioner was eligible / entitled to avail the benefit of DTVSV (Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas) Act in accordance with law. Following the said communication, petitioner filed 27 applications for […]
HC held that the IT Department is not entitled to issue notice against the Corporate Debtor for unpaid tax claims after the approval of the resolution plan by the adjudicating authority.
Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Section 215 of the Act makes it clear that the Assessee is required to pay interest where he has paid advance tax less than 75% of the assessed tax, the Assessee is required to pay simple interest @ 15% p.a. from the first day of […]
Pune Saraf Association & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Bombay High Court) It is an admitted and undisputed position that currently, there are insufficient Hallmark Centres in the country. This, according to us, is a decisive factor to be taken into consideration at the interlocutory hearing of this Writ Petition. Whilst we appreciate […]
