Personal information like T.A. bill etc. cannot be directed to be given under the Right to Information Act, 2005 in view of Section 8(1)(j) of the said Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Lok Adalat could not have passed the order on merits and should have been referred the case to the Regular Court for adjudication and if the orders are passed thereafter the substantial right of the petitioner would have been affected, therefore, the impugned order dated 09.09.2017 be set aside and the case be referred to the regular Court for decision on merits.
M/s Kishan Lal Vs Additional Commissioner Of Commercial Tax (Chhattisgarh High Court) In the proviso (a) to sub-section (3) of Section 49 of the VAT Act an embargo has been created for the purpose that no proceeding initiating suo motu revision under Section 49 (3) shall be initiated after the expiry of three calendar years […]
When the applications are filed to restore the same, the Courts are expected to look into the matter not only in the technical angle but also it needs blending of humanity looking to the nature of the case for which the restoration is sought. Otherwise the Court would start emitting danger signals.
Natthani Infrastructures Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that petitioner has made an application on 05.04.2018 before the respondent authorities for reimbursement of additional Goods and Services Tax (GST) liability on civil contract and work order issued prior to implementation of Goods and Services Tax Act, […]
After issuing notice and after due dispatch, it must be placed in hands of the serving officer like the post office by speed post or by registered post etc., by which the officer issuing notice may not have control over the said notice after issuance of the said notice. It must be properly stamped and issued on the correct address to whom it has been Mere signing of notice cannot be equated with the issuance of notice as contemplated under Section 149 of the IT Act.
GST Council has not recommended levy of GST on high speed diesel and same is not notified by the Central Government under Section 9(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
It is held that The information seeker is only entitled for damages and cost, if any, as there is no provision in the Act of 2005 for payment of penalty or part thereof recovered from Erring Information Officer to the information seeker and therefore information seeker cannot as a matter of right claim audience in the penalty proceedings which are between the Commission and Erring Information Officer
The Chhattisgarh High Court, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Central Revenue v. Chhattisgarh Urology Society recently announced that a society consists of urologist doctors eligible for registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act.
No notice was served to the petitioner under Section 148(1) of the IT Act and service of notice to the Chartered Accountant of the petitioner Company is not service at all and participation of the petitioner Company by filing return and filing objection to the notice to the reasons to believe cannot be held to be a valid service of notice
