Lakshya Vintrade Private Limited Vs Union of India And Ors. (Calcutta High Court) The sole ground by the petitioner for challenging the impugned order under Section 148A(d) of the Act is that the same is not a speaking order and the reasons recorded therein are not well-reasoned and satisfactory which according to me cannot be […]
Pending investigation, GST department exercised its powers to tag exporter as risky exporter to enable department to verify export consignments etc., strict timelines provided under Circular No. 131/1/2020-GST, dated 23-1-2020 are to be adhered
HC should not interfere in these types of cases where full-fledged investigations are required on alleged fictitious transaction/claim and all these are matters of evidence which cannot be appreciated by the writ court.
Calcutta High Court held that rendering of advisory service doesn’t amount to Fees for Technical Services/ Fees for Included Services under Article 12(4)(b) of the India-US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement.
Calcutta High Court held that compensation duly assessed taking the annual income after statutory deduction in terms of Income Tax Return.
Dilip Bhikhalal Desai Vs DCIT (Calcutta High Court) Justice Shekhar B Saraf in this order was dealing with challenge to the order u/s 148A(d) and Notice u/s 148 dated 29th July,2022 which was passed by the AO for the AY 2015-16 admittedly relying on the Instruction No 01/2022 dated 11th May, 2022 and Appellant argued […]
A short question of law involved in this writ petition is that whether a second notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 issued by the assessing officer after the expiry of one year as per Section 153(6)(i) is valid without disposing the return filed to the first notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act for the very same assessment year.
Calcutta High Court held that timeline prescribed under Regulation 17(7) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 (CBLR, 2018) relating to completion of the proceedings and passing of the final order within 90 days from the date of receipt of inquiry report is mandatory in nature.
Assessee should not be non-suited for the default committed by the revenue in nor preferring the appeal within the period of limitation
HC held that, directing assessee to prefer an appeal will not be effective as the facts, which it seeks to bring on record were not a part of records before original authority.
