Delhi High Court

Physically record statement in alleged GST evasion case: HC directs Byju’s CFO

P V Rao Vs Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General Of GST Intelligence & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

The present petition is filed to seek a writ of Mandamus to direct Respondent No. 1, the Senior Intelligence Officer, Director General of GST Intelligence (“DGGSTI”) to allow the Petitioner to tender his statement and adduce evidence through video conferencing, in relation to a summon issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017. ...

Read More

In absence of order by Adjudicating Authority within 180 days, Provisional Attachment Order under PMLA ceases to have effect

Vikas WSP Ltd. & Ors. Vs Directorate Enforcement & Anr. (Delhi High Court)

Vikas WSP Ltd. & Ors. Vs Directorate Enforcement & Anr. (Delhi High Court) Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (ACT) empowers the Director or any other officer not below the rank of the Deputy Director authorized by the Director of Enforcement in this regard, to pass an order […]...

Read More

HC remanded back the matter to CIC as order was passed without discussing the issue

S R Dass Vs CPIO and Nodal Officer (Delhi High Court)

S R Dass Vs Cpio And Nodal Officer (Delhi High Court) The learned counsels for the respondents, however, again reiterates that the documents of a third party are exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(d) of the Act. They submit that a reply on the similar terms had also been issued to the petitioner vide letter […]...

Read More

HC imposes cost on DGFT officer for passing order without any application of mind

Nautilus Metal Crafts Pvt. Ltd. Vs Joint Director General of Foreign Trade (Delhi High Court)

Nautilus Metal Crafts Pvt. Ltd. Vs Joint Director General of Foreign Trade (Delhi High Court) The Show Cause Notice was for ‘availing Special MEIS benefits fraudulently by mis-declaration and forgery of documents’. The petitioner in its reply had categorically submitted that it had not claimed or submitted any documents for gr...

Read More

IT Department cannot access data of other clients of a CA if search related to one particular client

S.R. Batliboi & Co. Vs Department of Income Tax (Investigation) (Delhi High Court)

S.R. Batliboi & Co. Vs Department of Income Tax (Investigation) (Delhi High Court) Conclusion: If apparently reliable material could not be directly used against an assessee solely because it was not collected during a Search of that assessee, a fortiori, material palpably concerning a third party with no connection with the raided pa...

Read More

Providing Information regarding ongoing Income Tax investigation to informer is not appropriate: HC

Principal Director, Income Tax (Investigation) Vs Rajiv Yaduvanshi & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Principal Director, Income Tax Vs Rajiv Yaduvanshi (Delhi High Court) Moreover, in cases pertaining to Tax evasion petitions like the present case, this Court also exercises its powers sparingly and it is a well-settled principle that only the broad outcome of the Tax evasion petition may be communicated to the complainant, that too upon ...

Read More

Section 87(b)(i) not makes directors of Company, Vicariously or Jointly Liable for Dues of Company

Sanjiv Kumar Mittal Vs Deputy Commissioner (TRC), CGST Commissionerate Delhi South & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Sanjiv Kumar Mittal Vs Deputy Commissioner (TRC), CGST Commissionerate Delhi South & Ors. (Delhi High Court) SECTION 87(b)(i) OF THE FINANCE ACT PROVIDES FOR A  GARNISHEE ORDER ONLY – i.e. PROVIDES FOR ATTACHMENT OF FUNDS OF AN ASSESSEE LYING WITH THIRD PARTIES. THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THE FINANCE ACT MAKING AN EX-DIRECTOR, EVEN I...

Read More

Bank can institute/continue with proceedings against a Guarantor under SARFAESI despite IBC proceedings against Principal Borrower

Kiran Gupta Vs State Bank of India & Anr. (Delhi high Court)

Kiran Gupta Vs State Bank of India & Anr. (Delhi high Court) Whether a Bank/Financial Institution can institute or continue with proceedings against a Guarantor under the SARFAESI Act, when proceedings under the IBC have been initiated against the Principal Borrower & the same are pending adjudication? Section 128 of the Contract ...

Read More

HC: Power To Conduct Service Tax Audit is saved under GST Act

Vianaar Homes Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner CGST (Delhi High Court)

Vianaar Homes Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner CGST (Delhi High Court) Conclusion: Authorities had power under Section 174(2)(e) of the CGST Act, 2017 to institute any investigation, inquiry, verification, assessment proceedings, adjudication, etc. under Rule 5A of the Service Tax Rules. Held: Assessee-company was engaged in the ...

Read More

HC approves SVLDRS-1 despite Clerical Error considering it as unintentional

Bhawna Malhotra Vs Union of India & Anr. (High Court Delhi)

The issue under consideration is whether any clerical or arithmetical error made by an applicant in SVLDRS-1 also falls within the ambit of Section 128 of Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019?...

Read More

Blocking of the e-credit ledger – Mismatch of GSTR-2A and 3B

Goyal Iron And Steel Traders Vs Assistant Commissioner Palam Division CGST Delhi South & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Goyal Iron And Steel Traders Vs Assistant Commissioner Palam Division CGST Delhi South & Ors. (Delhi High Court) High Court directed to decide the matter by way of a reasoned order where the electronic credit ledger was blocked citing a mismatch in the Input Tax Credit claimed in GSTR-3B and that appearing in GSTR-2A. High COurt he...

Read More

PIL against Mobile Gaming Apps- HC ask govt to treat PIL as representation

Tarun Chandiok Vs Union of India & Anr. (Delhi High Court)

The instant PIL is related to some of the mobile gaming apps, which allegedly facilitate online gambling, that have been referred to in the petition such as Adda52 Poker, PokerStars, Zynga Poker, Teen Patti Gold, Poker Rummy and Texas Hold’em Poker....

Read More

Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2020 -Litigation started

Lakshya Budhiraja Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Lakshya Budhiraja Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) The petition has been listed before this Bench by the Registry in view of the urgency expressed therein. The same has been heard by way of video conferencing. Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to grant an opportunity of hearing […]...

Read More

No injunction against BFA for infringement of CFA registered mark

CFA Institute Vs Brickwork Finance Academy (Delhi High Court)

CFA Institute Vs Brickwork Finance Academy (Delhi High Court) Conclusion: High Court refused to grant an injunction against the Banking Financial Analyst (BFA) for the alleged infringement of Chartered Financial Analysts (CFA) registered mark as the class of customers who were likely to avail/pursue the courses of the either CFA or BFA wo...

Read More

High Court Allows to File Revised Returns for FY 2017-18 under DVAT

GSP Power System Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax Department Of Trade And Taxes & Anr. (Delhi High Court)

In the instant case, petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner’s revision of returns for the year 2017-18 as per the provisions of DVAT Act and Rules....

Read More

Stay application should be disposed off after considering prima facie merits of case

Ikea Trading (India) Pvt. Ltd.Vs Commissioner of Trade And Tax (Delhi High Court)

IKEA Trading (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Trade and Tax (Delhi High Court) Facts- Appellant is engaged in local procurement and export of home furnishing products like carpets, dhurries, fabrics, plastic articles, lamps, soft toys. Appellant purchased products from a number of domestic vendors situated outside the state of Delhi ...

Read More

GST: HC refuses to entertain writs as alternate remedy against attachment order was available

Neutron Steel Trading Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner CGST (Delhi High Court)

Neutron Steel Trading Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner CGST (Delhi High Court) Petitioners have a remedy against the order of attachment by way of filing objection under sub-rule (5) of rule 159 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, this court would be reluctant to entertain these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution [&he...

Read More

LLP Settlement Scheme, 2020 benefit cannot be denied on Form uploaded pursuant to Court Order

Handoo & Handoo Legal Consultants & ANR. Vs. Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Handoo & Handoo Legal Consultants Vs. Union of India (Delhi High Court) The plea of the petitioner(s) in the present applications is that they have been denied the benefit of the Scheme only on the ground that they uploaded the forms pursuant to the order dated 06.12.2018 of this Court. The learned counsel for the […]...

Read More

Director not responsible for cheque issued & Dishonoured post his retirement

Alibaba Nabibasha Vs Small farmers agri-busines Consortium & ORS (Delhi High Court)

Alibaba Nabibasha Vs Small farmers agri-busines Consortium & ORS (Delhi High Court) The Petitioner ceased to be the director of the respondent No. 2 with effect from 27th October 2010. The resignation of the petitioner was also notified to MCA. The cheques, totaling to INR 45 Lakhs, were issued on 31st December 2018 by respondent [&he...

Read More

HC Permits Disqualified Director with Frozen DIN & DSC to Avail CFSS 2020

Ashish Gupta Vs. Union of India (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether Disqualified Director whose DIN and DSC has been frozen by the ROC due to non compliance will be eligible for Companies Fresh Start Scheme 2020?...

Read More

Bhushan Steel Case: HC quashes summons issued to limited extent against PNB Executive Director

Rajesh Kumar Yaduvanshi Vs. Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) & Anr. (Delhi High Court)

Rajesh Kumar Yaduvanshi Vs. Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) & Anr. (Delhi High Court) The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning a summoning order dated 16.08.2019 issued by the learned ASJ in Complaint Case No. 770/2019 captioned “Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) v. Bhushan Steel Limited and Ors.”,...

Read More

Delhi HC rejects plea challenging 12% Rate of GST on Fabric

Manufacturers Traders Association Vs. Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Petition requesting to notify the GST rate of 5% for all varieties of fabrics falling under Chapters 50 to 63 of the Customs Tariff in furtherance of the recommendations made by the Goods and Service Tax Council...

Read More

Exemption notification should be interpreted strictly: Delhi HC

Apeejay Infra-Logistics Private Ltd. Union of India (Delhi High Court )

Apeejay Infra-Logistics Private Ltd. Union of India (Delhi High Court ) We would like to refer to the verdict given by the Supreme Court relating to tax exemptions in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai vs. Dilip Kumar and Company & Ors., (2018) 9 SCC 1, wherein, the Supreme Court examined several precedents […...

Read More

HC orders to Deposit Profiteered Amount & Stays Interest & Penalty Imposed by NAA

Gaurav Sharma Food Industries Vs Union of India & Ors (Delhi High Court)

High Court directed the petitioner to deposit principal profiteered amount but stayed interest and penalty imposed by National Anti-Profiteering Authority (NAA)....

Read More

HC Grants Bail to Corruption accused considering Lack of direct evidence

Jayalakshmi Jaitly Vs Central Bureau of Investigation  (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is appellant seeks suspension of sentence awarded by Trial Court for 4 years for the offence punishable under Section 9 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988....

Read More

No quashing of Detention Order for mere delay in Execution

Mohd Nashruddin Khan Vs. Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Mohd Nashruddin Khan Vs. Union of India (Delhi  High Court) The instant petition is filed by the petitioner to seek quashing of the respective Detention Orders. High Court state that the Supreme Court has held that the basis of detention is the satisfaction of the Executive – of a reasonable probability of the likelihood of […]...

Read More

GST Rule 90(3) treating Rectified Refund Application as fresh, challenged

Insitel Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors (Delhi High Court)

A refund application under Section 54 of the CGST Act read with Rule 89 and Rule 90(3) of the CGST Rules is automatically treated as rejected and the second refund application is treated as a fresh application and the interest amount is calculated only from the date of the second refund application or subsequent applications which are fil...

Read More

906 Gms Jewellery gms was Reasonable for Assessee Married for More than 25 years

Ashok Chaddha Vs ITO (Delhi High Court)

whether the Tribunal is correct in making the addition of the entire jewellery found at the time of search as undisclosed income without appreciating that the said jewellery was acquired at the time of marriage over a period of time?...

Read More

Rejection of Form SVLDRS-1 justified if Assessee not declares all his tax dues

Chaque Jour HR Services Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Chaque Jour Hr Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Section 129 nowhere contemplates fragmented settlement of tax dues. The discharge certificate issued under Section 126 with respect to the amount payable under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS’) is considered to be conclusive...

Read More

HC allows Kyrgyzstan National accused of Gold Smuggling to Back to Kyrgyzstan for 45 days

Aida Askerbekova Vs Department of Customs (Delhi High Court)

The present petition is filed by one Kyrgyzstan National who is seeking permission to go back to Kyrgyzstan which is earlier denied by the Customs Authority bacause 3150 gms of gold was recovered from the possession of the petitioner....

Read More

No Coercive Action by DGGI Without a Weeks Prior Notice: Delhi HC

Directorate General of GST Intelligence Vs Mukesh Garg (Delhi High Court)

No Coercive Action by DGGI against Respondent Without a Weeks Prior Notice: Delhi HC...

Read More

No Bar U/s. 245R(2)(i) merely due to notice asking applicant to produce any evidence in support of its return

CIT Vs Authority for Advance Ruling Income Tax (Delhi High Court)

CIT Vs Authority for Advance Ruling (Delhi High Court) The issue under consideration is whether the question raised in the notice under Section 143(2) can be stated to be ‘pending’ to attract clause (i) of the proviso to Section 245R(2) of the Act? In the present case, the petitioner i.e CIT argues that since the […]...

Read More

Section 54/54F- Purchase of under construction flat from builder- Purchase or Construction?

PCIT Vs Akshay Sobti (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether agreement for construction of house interpreted as agreement for purchase for availing benefits of deduction u/s 54F if construction completed within three years?...

Read More

Person Eligible for SVLDRS, 2019 even if Amount quantified on or before 30.06.2019 gets Modified Subsequently

Seventh Plane Network Private ltd. Vs. Union of India & ORS. (Delhi High Court)

Seventh Plane Network Private ltd. Vs. Union of India & ORS. ( Delhi High Court) The issue under consideration is whether the petitioner was eligible to apply under the SVLDRS, 2019 even if the amount of duty involved in the audit had not been quantified before 30th June, 2019? High Court states that, the audit […]...

Read More

HC Set Aside Directors Disqualification on June 2017 considering CFSS 2020

Sandeep Agarwal & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Anr. (Delhi High Court)

Companies Fresh Start Scheme, 2020 provides an opportunity for active companies who may have defaulted in filing of documents, to put their affairs in order. It thus provides Directors of such companies a fresh cause of action to also challenge their disqualification qua the active companies....

Read More

RTI Seeking Details of Minutes of Meeting of GSTN – HC refers matter back to CIC

Goods and Service Tax Network Vs Information Commissioner, CIC & Anr. (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether RTI application seeking disclosure of Minutes of the Board Meeting & resolutions of Goods & Service Tax Network (GSTN) by information commissioner will be sustain in law?...

Read More

Credit Rating of Securities – Jindal Power Ltd. Vs ICRA Ltd

Jindal Power Ltd. v. ICRA Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

Jindal Power Ltd. v. ICRA Ltd. (Delhi High Court) In order to protect the interest of investors and help them make an informed decision, SEBI has made credit rating of securities offered by Indian companies by way of public or rights issues to be mandatory.  The rating signifies the ability and willingness of the issuer […]...

Read More

Withholding of Income Tax refund mere due to issue of Scrutiny is not valid

Conner Institute of Health Care And Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (Delhi High Court)

Conner Institute of Health Care And Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) The exercise of withholding of refund under section 241A of the Act, pursuant to notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, without recording justifiable reasons, is not in consonance with the legislative intent and mandate of the aforesaid provision. The reasons [...

Read More

HC Stays Insolvency Proceedings initiated by SBI against Anil Ambani

Anil Dhirajlal Ambani Vs State Bank of India (Delhi High Court)

Anil Dhirajlal Ambani Vs State Bank of India (Delhi High Court) Issue notice. Mr. Nirav Shah accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1; Mr. Akshay Makhija accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.2 & 3; Mr. Vikas Mehta accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.4; and Ms.Kavita Jha accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.5. [&hel...

Read More

Shared received post amalgamation taxable as per substance of transaction to be Valued Entirely on Different Fundamentals

CIT Vs Nalwa Investment Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether proceeds release from shares exchange with new shares because of amalgamation process will be taxable under income tax?...

Read More

Employee of PSU & Nationalised Banks Not Treated as Government Employee for Exemption u/s 10(10AA)

Kamal Kumar Kalia & Ors Vs Union Of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether the assessee being employee of Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) and Nationalised Banks treated as government employee for the purpose of exemption u/s (10AA)(i)?...

Read More

No Equalisation Levy Applicable in case of Mastercard Asia

Mastercard Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether the equalisation levy will be applicable in case of Mastercard Asia or not?...

Read More

HC direct GST authorities to decide on release of IGST & Duty Drawback

AAR Impex Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)

High Court direct GST authorities to decide Question of IGST & Duty Drawback...

Read More

HC dismisses plea to include masks & sanitizers in Essential Commodity

Gaurav Yadav & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Gaurav Yadav & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) (a) What items are to be included under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 as ‘Essential Commodity’, is a policy decision of the respondent/Government and, therefore, unless the decision can be shown to be manifestly unreasonable or arbitrary, this Court ...

Read More

HC Dismisses Petition Seeking Relief from Pre-deposit for Filing Appeal before Tribunal

Dish TV India Limited Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Dish TV India Limited Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) High Court dismissed the petition filed for seeking relief from Pre-deposit for filing of appeal since the assessee is earning sufficient turnover to pay the pre-deposit and hence court has clearly state that the Tribunal will entertain the appeal only on payment [&hell...

Read More

Interpret SVLDR Scheme liberally to allow Businesses to Make Fresh Beginning

Vaishali Sharma Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

whether application filed under the SVLDR Scheme rejected on the sole ground that the demand was neither quantified without giving opportunity of being heard is justified in law?...

Read More

No Prosecution u/s 138 of NI Act for Dishonour of Cheque due to Difference in Figures & Words

Shree Tyres Vs State (Patiala House Court of Delhi)

The issue under consideration is whether prosecution u/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act can be levied for dishonour of a cheque on cheque having difference in the amount in figures and words?...

Read More

HC dismisses PIL to include Advocates in Definition of ‘Professionals’ under MSMED Act

Abhijit Mishra Vs Union of India & Ors (Delhi High Court)

Whether the public interest litigation (PIL) challenging non-inclusion of advocates in the definition of the word 'professionals' under the MSMED Act, 2006 will be entertained by High Court?...

Read More

HC cannot be approached without exhausting the remedy of appeal if order is Appealable

Saraf Industries Vs Assistant Commissioner (Delhi High Court)

Opening page of the impugned order itself makes it abundantly clear that the said order is appealable before the Additional Commissioner, GST and instead of exhausting the remedy of appeal available to the petitioner, it has directly rushed to this court, which is impermissible....

Read More

Appeal preferred on merits cannot be rejected merely due to delay: HC

Sachin Enterprise Vs Assistant Commissioner (Delhi High Court)

Sachin Enterprise Vs Assistant Commissioner (Delhi High Court) Keeping in view the aforesaid order dated 20th July, 2020 passed by a Coordinate Division Bench, we are not inclined to entertain the present petition when the petitioner has an equally alternate efficacious remedy of preferring an appeal before the Additional Commissioner, GS...

Read More

HC declines to Grant stay on Recovery of Profiteered Amount

Apex Meadows Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Apex Meadows Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) The counsel for the petitioner states that out of Rs.3,45,22,974/-, benefit of an amount of Rs.1.53 crores has already been given to the flat buyers and now only the balance amount of Rs. 1.92 crores approx. remains. He states that in several […]...

Read More

GST: No coercive steps for recovery without following adjudication process: HC

Rishi Bansal Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Rishi Bansal Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT The petition has been listed before this Bench by the Registry in view of the urgency expressed therein. The same has been heard by way of video conferencing. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the letter dated […]...

Read More

Transitional Credit Issue- HC decides to wait for SC judgment in Brand Equity case

U.C. Infosystems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)

U.C. Infosystems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner tried to file TRAN -1 form within the time provided under Rule 117 as well as the extended time given by this Court vide judgment dated 05th May, 2020 in Brand Equity Treaties Ltd. Vs. […]...

Read More

Deficiency in GST refund application cannot be raised at belated stage

Jain International Vs Commissioner of Delhi Goods (Delhi High Court)

Jain International Vs Commissioner of Delhi Goods (Delhi High Court) Admittedly, till date the petitioner‟s refund application dated 4th November, 2019 has not been processed. As neither any acknowledgment in FORM GST RFD-02 has been issued nor any deficiency memo has been issued in RFD-03 within time line of fifteen days, the refund ap...

Read More

Delhi HC grant Refund along with Interest in case of Zero Rated Supply after 15 days

Jian International Vs Commissioner of Delhi Goods And Services Tax (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether the non issuance of refund after 7 days from the date of acknowledgment in case of zero rated supply u/s 90 is justified in law?...

Read More

HC allows Samsonite to pay profiteered amount in 6 monthly instalments

M/s. Samsonite South Asia Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

In this case although learned counsel for respondent-Authority objects to the grant of instalments to the petitioner Samsonite South Asia Pvt. Ltd. , yet this Court keeping in view the COVID-19 pandemic situation, directs the petitioner to deposit the principal profiteered amount i.e. Rs.21,81,20,748/-  in six equated monthly instalments...

Read More

HC allows Patanjali to deposit profiteered amount in 6 installments

Patanjali Ayurved Ltd Vs Union Of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Due to COVID-19 pandemic high court approves that Patanjali can deposits the amount of penalty in question in the consumer welfare fund in six monthly installments....

Read More

Withholding of refund for non-completion of assessment is invalid

Cooner Institute of Health Care And Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO (Delhi High Court)

Cooner Institute of Health Care And Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (Delhi High Court) Delhi High Court Direction To Release Refund Withheld Without Valid Reasons And Based On Flawed Assumption only ground for withholding refund is that since case of the petitioner has been selected for scrutiny for AY 2018-19, under Section 143(2) of [&...

Read More

Data Transmission Services not amounts to Royalty as per Indo-Thai DTAA

CIT Vs Thaicom Public Company Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

Data Transmission Services did not amount to royalty in terms of Article 12 of the Indo-Thai Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement....

Read More

TDS Refund: Approach jurisdictional TDS Assessing Officer- HC

Clean Wind Power Kurnool Private Limited Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court)

Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to remove technical glitches and enable the TRACES portal so that petitioner can file its refund application for the excess Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) deposited by it....

Read More

HC denies relief in section 147 proceedings for not replying notice for 6 Months

Kuldip Kumar Goel Vs ACIT & Anr. (Delhi High Court)

he Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India Ltd.) v. Income Tax Officer 259 ITR 19 (SC) has clarified that when a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the notice is to file a return and if he so desire, to seek reasons for issuing notices....

Read More

GST Anti-profiteering- Delhi HC stays NAA order asking Reckitt to deposit Rs 63 lakh

Reckitt Benckiser India Private Limited Vs Union of India And Ors (Delhi High Court)

In the latest anti profiteering case of pharma major Reckitt Benckiser over alleged profiteering of 63 lakh from the sale of Dettol handwash between 2017 to 2019, Hon’ble Delhi High court has stayed the order of National anti-profiteering authority for deposit of alleged profiteering amount in the consumer welfare fund. ...

Read More

Section 292BB is applicable to assessee & not to a legal representative

Savita Kapila, Legal Heir Of Late Shri Mohinder Paul Kapila Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)

In the absence of a statutory provision it is difficult to cast a duty upon the legal representatives to intimate the factum of death of an assessee to the income tax department. After all, there may be cases where the legal representatives are estranged from the deceased assessee or the deceased assessee may have bequeathed his entire we...

Read More

Factors to consider for Payment of Rent during Lockdown

Ramanand & Others Vs Dr. Girish Soni and Another (Delhi High Court)

Temporary non-use of premises due to the lockdown which was announced due to the COVID-19 outbreak cannot be construed as rendering the lease void under Section 108(B)(e) of the TPA. The tenant cannot also avoid payment of rent in view of Section 108(B)(l)....

Read More

Stay on NCLT Order Initiating Insolvency Proceedings against MSME

Pankaj Aggarwal Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Whether the NCLT was correct in passing an order of initiation of the CIRP against a MSME without considering the fact that the minimum threshold limit of filing application in NCLT has been increased to Rs. 1 Crore?...

Read More

Losing Party cannot seek an Order under Section 34 of Arbitration Act

Tecnimont Private Limited & Anr. Vs ONGC Petro Additions Limited (Delhi High Court)

A petition under Section 34 of the Act is only for setting aside an Arbitral Award on the limited grounds provided under Section 34 of the Act. Therefore, the mere pendency of Section 34 proceedings cannot afford a ground for a party to assert that it has a dispute regarding contractual performance....

Read More

Brief Order a must for ‘Advertisement before Acceptance’ of Trademark

Jai Bhagwan Gupta Vs Registrar of Trademarks & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

The Petitioner relied upon Section 9 and Section 11 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 and submitted that the Respondent should examine the trademark applications in an efficient and proper manner in order to ensure that none of the marks which are brought before the Respondent are similar to that which are already registered and not clear for a...

Read More

Transitional Credit- Delhi HC to hear the issue on 16.09.2020

Rehau Polymers Private Limited Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Even in case the supreme court decide the above case in favour of assessee and make amendment section 140 of CGST Act, still that change will not allowed petitioner to claim Transitional Credit....

Read More

Position of Multiplicity of Arbitration Proceedings & of Subsequent Award Rendering the Previous Award Illegal

Gammon India Ltd. & Anr. Vs National Highways Authority of India (Delhi High Court)

The Court concluded that the findings of a Subsequent Award would not render the previous Award illegal or contrary to law. To find the validity of the Award, the Award had to be tested as on the date when it was pronounced, on its own merits....

Read More

TDS wrongly deposited-Claim of refund- Delhi HC judgement

Clean Wind Power Kurnool Private Limited Vs DCIT (Delhi High Court)

Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to remove technical glitches and enable the TRACES portal so that petitioner can file its refund application for the excess Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) deposited by it....

Read More

Determination of Rental Payouts In Lock Down

Ramanand & Others Vs Dr. Girish Soni and Another (Delhi High Court)

Ramanand & Others Vs Dr. Girish Soni and Another (Delhi High Court) Amidst the outbreak of COVID-19, An application for suspension of rent has been moved to Delhi High Court. It is pleaded that tenants are entitled to wavier of the monthly payouts or at least some partial relief in terms of suspension, postponement or […]...

Read More

Wrong ITC availment – HC order DGGI to complete Investigation in 3 months

Watermelon Management Service Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Tax, GST (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether the contention of the petitioner that the provisional attachment for wrong availment of ITC is without jurisdiction and illegal is correct?...

Read More

HC Stays Penalty order passed by IBBI against alleged Moratorium Term violations

Mohan Lal Jain Vs IBBI (Delhi High Court)

Stay against Penalty order under IBC allowed against petitioner who has violated Terms of Moratorium...

Read More

HC stays Interest, Penalty & Investigation imposed by NAA in Phillips India case

Phillips India Limited Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Writ petition is filed for challenging order passed by National Anti-Profiteering Authority under CGST Act. HC approved Stay Application for Interest, Penalty & Investigation levied by Anti-Profiteering Authority...

Read More

Territorial Jurisdiction of A Court For Enforcement of Award

Glencore International AG Vs Hindustan Zinc Limited (Delhi High Court)

The Court examined the contentions of the Petitioner that the Respondent had Bank Accounts and other moveable properties within the territorial jurisdiction of New Delhi along with the Administrative Office. Further, the Respondent submitted that the immovable property was on lease and not owned by the Respondent. However, the Court no...

Read More

HC instructs refund of Service Tax paid under Promoter with interest

Team HR Services Private Ltd Vs Union of India & Anr (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is relating to the writ petition filed for seeking refund of pre-deposit of Service Tax  alongwith interest. Question is whether petitioner will get the refund or not?...

Read More

Moving objections in 7 days to provisional attachment- Rule 159(5) is directory

RR India Pvt. Ltd Vs Union Of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

The period of 7 days prescribed in rule 159(5) of the CGST Rules for moving the objections to the provisional attachment is merely directory and not mandatory....

Read More

No TDS on Reimbursement of cost to cost management expenses to parent company

CIT Vs Expeditors International (India) (P.) Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

CIT Vs Expeditors International (India) (P.) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Assessee-company was engaged in business of supplying chain management, logistics and freight forwarding related to movement of goods and cargo within India or outside by road, rail, air or ship – It involved activities of packing, loading/unloading, trucking, tend...

Read More

Section 68: Creditworthiness of lender can’t be proved merely on strength of Bank Statement

Siddharth Export Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether AO is correct in treating unsecured loan received by assessee as unexplained credit under section 68?...

Read More

Rights of Registered Trademark Holder vis-à-vis Prior User of a Descriptive Trademark

Peps Industries Private Limited Vs. Kurlon Limited (Delhi High Court)

In the present case, the Court by its reasoned order had refused to grant an injunction on the basis that the alleged infringing mark is descriptive in nature and does not tarnish the goodwill of the Plaintiff. Also the same is being used as a label by the Defendant and not as a trademark per se....

Read More

Open GST Portal by 19.06.2020 for filing of Form GST Trans-1: HC

Mangla Hoist P. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)

Mangla Hoist P. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) Admittedly, the judgment in Brand Equity Treaties Limited (supra), has not been stayed so far and therefore, the respondents are under an obligation to abide by the directions issued therein by adequately publicising the said decision and uploading it on their website as also [&hel...

Read More

Enable filing of rectified TRAN-1 electronically or accept it manually: HC

Arora & Co. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Arora & Co. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Senior Standing counsel for GST submits that petitioner was given an opportunity to submit evidence to demonstrate technical glitch for re-considering his request, however, he failed to do so and thus his representation was rejected. He submits that as per GST system logs, [&...

Read More

Assessee cannot be deprived of Transitional Credit : HC

Soni Traders Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Soni Traders Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) it emanates that the Respondents have no cogent ground to deny the benefit of the Notification No. 49/2019 dated 09.10.2019 issued specifically to grant relief to taxpayers who faced difficulty in filing Form GST TRAN-1 due to technical glitches. Credit standing in favour of an...

Read More

HC dismisses of ED’s plea to revoke Rajiv Saxena’s approver status

Directorate of Enforcement Vs Rajiv Saxena (Delhi High Court)

Once the accused was granted pardon by the Court and was made approver, the status of the accused changed from accused to witness/approver.  However, if the approver, failed to comply with the conditions of order granting him pardon, he made him liable to be tried as accused subject to the conditions as laid down in Section 308 Cr PC. ...

Read More

Commissioner to decide on extending time for filing of revised GST TRAN-1: HC

Jai Laxmi Cement Co.(P.) Ltd. Vs Union Of India (Allahabad High Court)

Jai Laxmi Cement Co.(P.) Ltd. Vs Union Of India (Allahabad High Court) Rule 120A of the CGST Rules, 2017 provides that where a registered dealer submits a declaration electronically in FORM GST TRAN-1 within the time period specified in Rule 117, Rule 118, Rule 119 and Rule 120 he may revise such declaration once and […]...

Read More

Brand Equity judgment continue to apply despite retrospective amendment to Section 140: Delhi HC

SKH Sheet Metals Components Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Delhi High Court in its judgment pronounced today has held that judgment in Brand Equity will continue to apply  in-spite of retrospective amendment to Section 140 by The Finance (Amendment) Act, 2020....

Read More

Tribunal can direct provisional release of seized gold, jewelry lies

Additional Director General (Adjudication) Vs Its My Name Pvt Ltd (Delhi High Court)

Tribunal's power and jurisdiction of  hearing an appeal against an order of provisional release was coequal with the power exercised by the adjudicating authority. Tribunal had the power to direct provisional release of gold jewellery, seized as well as to fix the terms....

Read More

Exporter liable to pay fine for violation of terms of DFCE Scheme

Kanak Exports Through Its Proprietor Mr. Satish Bansal Vs Union Of India (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether the imposition of cost of one lakh rupees on an exporter for the blatant violation of the Duty-Free Credit Entitlement Scheme (DFCE) is justified in law?...

Read More

Exchange fluctuation loss on Business Advances Allowable

Sitae Re Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)

Whether the exchange fluctuation loss on Business Advance on Balance Sheet considered as business loss by Appellant are allowable under Section 37(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961?...

Read More

Selection of comparable can be challenged even if same clears filters

PCIT Vs Open Solutions Software Services Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

Since none of the comparables had been excluded on the ground of high turnover alone, the test of functional similarity applied by the Tribunal was in consonance with the legal position and moreover, assessee could not be denied a chance to challenge the inclusion of a comparable merely for the reason that the selected comparable cleared ...

Read More

DGFT cannot Restriction Advance Authorisation through Public Notice

M. D. Overseas Limited Vs Union of India And Ors. (Delhi High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether the Public notice issued by DGFT for restricting the issuance of Advance Authorisation is justified in law?...

Read More

Interplay between Patents and Tradesecrets

Claudio De Simone & Ors. Vs. Acital Farmaceutica SRL. & Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Claudio De Simone & Ors. Vs. Acital Farmaceutica SRL. & Ors. (Delhi High Court);  CS(OS) 576/2019, IA No.15741/2019, 17.03.2020 FACTS In the present case, Plaintiff No. 1 was an inventor of a US patent formulation namely; De Simone Formulation. The said formulation is highly concentrated bacterial formulation beneficial for phar...

Read More

Delhi HC on Domain Name and Anti-Injunction Suit

HT Media Limited & Anr. Vs. Brainlink International, Inc. & Anr. (Delhi High Court)

The Court, in the present case, had appropriately restrained the Suit filed by the Defendant before the Eastern District of New York on the ground of being vexatious and oppressive. Further the Court rightly considered that Domain name is akin to a Trademark....

Read More

No penalty for mere upheld of additions by CIT (A)

PCIT Vs Junjab National Bank (Delhi High Court)

PCIT Vs Junjab National Bank (Delhi High Court)  Merely because additions made by the Assessing Officer have been partially upheld by the CIT (A), would not confer the ground to initiate proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act of imposition of penalty, unless it is found that there is concealment of material facts, or furnishing [...

Read More

HC allows bail to accused director since trial not possible due to lockdown

Aditya Kumar Bhandari Vs Serious Fraud Investigation Officer (Delhi High Court)

Bail was allowable to accused director of fraud on the reason that he was not the signatory to the alleged False Statement in the balance sheet of the Company and there was no loss caused either to any financial institution or Central/State Government and moreover, the trial proceedings is not possible within the reasonable time because o...

Read More

Grounds before ITAT can be raised even if no cross objection filed before CIT(A)

Sanjay Sawhney Vs PCIT (Delhi High Court)

Rule 27 embodies a fundamental principal that a Respondent who may not have been aggrieved by the final order of the Lower Authority or the Court, and therefore, has not filed an appeal against the same, is entitled to defend such an order before the Appellate forum on all grounds, including the ground which has been held against him by t...

Read More

Suit can’t be rejected outrightly u/s 4(3) of unamended Benami Act

Neeru Dhir and Ors. Vs Kamal Kishore Dhir and Ors. (Delhi High Court)

Suit ought not to have been rejected outright under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on the ground that the pleas taken by the appellants/plaintiffs were barred under Section 4(3) of the unamended Benami Act. It would therefore be imperative to weigh the evidence in the instant case for the court to conclusively decide as to whether the appellants/p...

Read More

Arbitration agreement not become null & void if allegations of fraud have to be inquired into by court

Spentex Industries Ltd. Vs Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP (Delhi High Court)

Spentex Industries Ltd. Vs Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP (Delhi High Court) In the given case, the plaintiff is seeking the main relief to pass a decree of declaration, declaring that the Letter of Engagement as well as arbitration clause being Article 16 of the Letter of Engagement is null and void, inoperative and […]...

Read More

Section 263 limitation period – When issue was discussed only in Original Assessment Order

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Delhi)

As in the present case before us, issues subject to revision were pertaining to original assessment and not the reopened assessment; the limitation should also start from the original assessment. In this case as original assessment order u/s 143(3) of the act was passed on 16.01.2014, the revision thereof could have been taken up to 31.3....

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,040)
Company Law (6,698)
Custom Duty (8,071)
DGFT (4,384)
Excise Duty (4,406)
Fema / RBI (4,431)
Finance (4,692)
Income Tax (35,030)
SEBI (3,753)
Service Tax (3,626)

Search Posts by Date

November 2020
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30