Assessee contended that the complaint filed by Respondent No.3 had not stated about the boundaries of Plot No 14 and there was no clarity as to from which side the encroachment was alleged to be carried out.
Bombay HC permits Pepperfry to file a belated reply to GST SCN, imposing Rs. 50k cost, and restores the matter before the concerned authority.
The application filed on 11th October, 2012 was not pressed and subsequently on 3rd July, 2013 another application was filed by the Respondents claiming compensation amount of USD 745580, maximum penalty of 50% and maximum interest of 12%.
Bombay High Court sets aside Section 148 notice in Anil Kumar Mehta vs ITO, citing procedural issues. Case remanded for fresh consideration by assessing officer.
Bombay High Court directed the State of Maharashtra [including BMC, CIDCO, MIDC, MHADA, BEST and Municipal Corporation of Nagpur] to ensure that there is no abuse or misuse of public funds for issuing advertisements for extraneous purpose.
Further, in reference application filed under the Settlement Act, the Dy CST passed an order of settlement u/s 13(1) and arrived at the same figure of the settlement amount which were calculated by the assessee in its application.
Bombay HC directs Maharashtra Govt. to enforce stamp duty exemption on affidavits and create awareness as per 2004 notification.
Bombay High Court held that there is no employer-employee relationship prior to the year 2018 hence industrial court doesn’t have jurisdiction to entertain complaint of unfair labour practice. Thus, writ allowed.
Indus Power Tech Inc. Vs Echjay Industries Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court) In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has determined that a company cannot be restrained from conducting its business following the termination of a contract, emphasizing that non-compete clauses do not provide grounds for injunctive relief after such termination. The case involved […]
Parle Products Ltd Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) The Bombay High Court recently ruled in favor of Parle Products Ltd., ordering a refund of excise duty paid voluntarily by the company on its exported products, which were otherwise covered by an exemption notification. The case, which centered on the classification and taxability of […]
