Armstrong Pure Water Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) Petitioner should have been proactive and promptly communicated the stay granted by this Court to the Assessing Officer so that he would have had enough time to make enquiries with his Advocate and also check on the website about orders passed. In […]
Lokhandwala Construction Industries Private Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) In this case, during the original assessment proceedings, a notice dated 19th October 2019 was issued under Section 142(1) of the Act by which petitioner was called upon to furnish copies of Index II(s) of three flats sold during the year. Petitioner responded by its […]
Having regard to the term of service of the petitioners, they had qualifying service, making them eligible for pension as per the Pension Rules. Petitioners are thus not entitled to claim the condonation of the interruption in their services to enhance their pension.
PCIT Vs Universal Music India Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court) Notice under Section 263 was issued by CIT on two issues, namely, (a) disallowance of Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) paid of Rs.10,72,532/- included in miscellaneous expenses and not allowed by the Assessing Officer and (b) provision of Rs.1,40,98,685/- in respect of slow moving and absolete […]
Ashoka Buildcon Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) HC held that Petitioners are allowed to file and correct TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 Form. In case it is not possible to file the same online, it shall be filed manually. FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT 1 In all these matters, the […]
Lokhandwala Construction Industries Private Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Once a query is raised during assessment proceedings and assessee has replied to it, it follows that the query raised was a subject matter of consideration of the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment. It is not necessary that an assessment order should contain reference […]
Malvika Rajnikant Mehta Vs JESS Construction (Bombay High Court) Facts- The applicants executed a deed of conveyance in favour of the respondent. The Conveyance Deed provided for a mechanism for resolution of dispute between the parties through arbitration to be presided over by Mr. Kirti K. Shah, an Architect, as the sole Arbitrator. Asserting that […]
Assessee who is deprived of refund of their amount in view of wrongful withholding of their amount by the authority cannot be refused to compensate for such wrongful deprivation of their amount lying with the authority for no fault of the assessees. We are inclined to allow the claim for the interest by way of compensation/damages at the rate of 6% p.a. for delayed period.
Medicos Legal Action Group Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) We see no reason to hold that merely because of enactment of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 upon repeal of the 1986 Act as well as the parliamentary debates referred to by the petitioning Trust, the efficacy of the law laid down in the decision […]
Samet Estates Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (Bombay High Court) It is Petitioner’s case that the same issue which is mentioned in the reasons for reopening was a subject matter of consideration during the assessment proceedings and the assessment order dated 20th December, 2010 in fact even discussed this item. Therefore, reopening is based on change […]
