The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition after holding that the petitioner had an effective statutory remedy before the NCLAT under Section 61 of the IBC. The Court ruled that writ jurisdiction cannot ordinarily be invoked when such an alternative remedy exists.
The Bombay High Court held that bad debt deduction cannot be denied where the debt was effectively written off through accounting entries despite the debtor’s account remaining open due to pending litigation. The ruling emphasizes substance over accounting form.
The Bombay High Court considered a challenge to a demand-cum-show cause notice on the ground that it was issued more than ten years after the alleged transaction. The Court issued notice to the respondents and permitted the petitioner to seek further relief if additional proceedings are initiated.
The Bombay High Court set aside the transfer of assessment jurisdiction after finding no cogent material or recorded reasons linking the assessee with the searched group. It held that a Section 127 transfer cannot be based on speculation.
The Bombay High Court held that a single show cause notice covering multiple financial years under Section 74 of the CGST Act was without jurisdiction. It quashed the show cause notice, adjudication order, and recovery proceedings, while permitting fresh notices for individual financial years if otherwise permissible in law.
The Court held that the impugned statements regarding outstanding dues, recovery proceedings, and litigation history were supported by judicial records. It refused to grant an injunction and dismissed the defamation claim at the interim stage.
The Bombay High Court held that a corporate guarantee cannot be equated with a bank guarantee and upheld a 0.5% guarantee commission rate. The Court rejected the Revenue’s challenge to the 3% rate adopted by the Transfer Pricing Officer.
The Bombay High Court held that TCS paid under protest before assessment must be considered while calculating the mandatory pre-deposit under Section 107(6)(b) of the CGST Act. The Court found that the amount already paid exceeded the statutory requirement, eliminating the need for any further deposit.
The Court held that the delay in e-verification of Form 10B during the pandemic was supported by bona fide reasons. It ruled that denying exemption on technical grounds would cause genuine hardship.
The Bombay High Court restrained authorities from initiating prosecution or penalty proceedings while considering a challenge to provisions of the Black Money Act. The Court allowed appellate proceedings before the CIT(A) to continue.
