Bombay High Court held that ‘water tax’ u/s. 141(1)(a) (i) and water benefit tax u/s. 140(1)(a)(ii) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act is leviable irrespective of the fact whether water is actually consumed by the owner/occupier or not.
Bombay High Court held that initiation of reopening of assessment after expiry of four years from the end of relevant assessment year without failure on part of the petitioner to disclose any material fact fully and truly is unsustainable in law.
Bombay High Court dismissed the PIL filed by a self-styled criminology firm observing that no mandamus can be issued merely for enforcing a particular thought of an individual or an organization, if it is not supported by any legal premise.
Bombay High Court held that show cause notice based on allegation that scheme approved by the Court is in contravention of provisions of the Finance Act quashed as order sanctioning the scheme has not been challenged by any authority and has attained finality.
Bombay High Court held that if the party is able to show the proof of supply to SEZ Unit, then non-submission of “Bill of Export” cannot be treated as non-discharge of proof of Export Obligation.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assails the Assessment Order dated 27 March, 2024 passed by Respondent No.2 under the provisions of Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The Bombay High Court quashed the 2023 order against Kabir Traders, remanding the case for reconsideration and reversing a debited amount of ₹8,15,489.
Bombay HC directed CBIC to allow GST return rectification by reopening the portal or manually if no revenue loss. A notice and hearing are required if opposed.
Bombay High Court imposed a cost on JAO and CCIT of Mumbai for not following judgement Hexaware case and Order them to deposit 25000 each as personal Cost with National Association for the Blind
Bombay High Court rules that CIT(A) cannot dismiss appeals for non-prosecution. Tribunal’s decision to restore appeal upheld.
