Bombay High Court held that the liability to pay ESI dues is of the company and in the event of there being an occupier, he is liable to meet the demand. However, the liability of the occupier is not personal.
Bombay High Court held that it was not permissible for the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to issue a notice under Section 148A(b), as the same would amount to breach of the provisions of section 151A of the Income Tax Act (i.e. faceless assessment scheme).
Bombay HC in appeals by M/s. Tolani Ltd. clarifies that investment allowance under Section 32A can include additional costs attributable to exchange rate fluctuations post-acquisition.
Read the full judgment of Umang Mahendra Shah Vs Union of India by Bombay High Court, ruling that an order under Section 148A(d) without Section 151 sanction is unlawful. Learn more about the implications.
Bombay High Court held that upto 1 April, 2005, the expression ‘built up area’ would exclude the balcony area and are not to be included while computing the built up area of the residential units, in housing project eligible for deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act.
Bombay High Court held that industrial dispute existed when the reference was made by the appropriate Government under section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Further, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 doesn’t provide any limitation for making a reference.
Bombay HC quashes inquiry against M. Ramzan & Co. under SVLDRS, 2019. Court rules inquiry invalid without finding false material particulars in declaration.
Bombay High Court held that security creditor who has registered its claim against secure assets with the Central Registry of Securitisation Asset Reconstruction and Security Interest of India (CERSAI) has priority over other debts.
Bombay High Court quashes reassessment notice in Paras Mahendra Shah vs. Union of India due to non-compliance with Section 151A of the Income Tax Act.
Bombay High Court held that liability for year 2010-2011 duly discharged by the petitioner. Hence, adjustment of refund for year 2011-2012 against liability for 2010-2011 unjustified. State authorities cannot retain the excess amount which is not in accordance with law
