The Hon’ble Delhi High Court while relying on Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgments observed that has observed that the principles of audi alteram partem have to be followed by the Patent Office while rejecting a patent application.
Delhi High Court of the petitioner is that the impugned proceedings for reassessment have been triggered against an entity, which is no longer in existence.
A mere discrepancy in filing the Income Tax Return instead of the Income Certificate, despite the two documents evidencing the same parameters of income requirements, cannot lead to a situation where an eligible meritorious candidate is deprived of the scholarship.
CIT, International Taxation Vs Westin Hotel Management LLP (Delhi High Court) 1. Present Income Tax Appeals have been filed challenging the common order dated 29th April, 2022 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in ITA No. 2013/Del./2019 for Assessment Year (‘AY’) 2015-16 and ITA No. 2012/Del./2019 for AY 2015-16. 2. Learned Counsel for […]
Mauria Udyog Ltd. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) It appears that in the present case, there was a technical problem that was required to be resolved. The respondents have now resolved the same by opening the portal for filing the revised forms including TRAN-1. Although this Court is of the view that if […]
Kpm Enterprises Vs The Commissioner, Delhi Goods And Service Tax & Ors (Delhi High Court) Appellant submit that alleged inspection by GST department, is in violation of the Rule 25 of 2017 GST Rules as the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity to be present at the site. Further, the respondent has also not uploaded […]
Emerson Process Management Power & Water Solutions India Pvt. Ltd Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) In the present case, the petitioner’s request for refund of CENVAT credit in cash was rejected for the reason that it was filed beyond the period of limitation. The petitioner submits that although it was no longer entitled […]
DRP is not empowered to set aside any proposed variation or issue any direction under Section 144C(5) for further enquiry for passing the assessment order and therefore, the disallowance proposed under Section 37 (1) of the Act was without jurisdiction.
It is settled principle of law that at the stage of granting registration u/s 12AA of the Act, ld. CIT (E) is not to examine the application of income, which is to be done by the AO on year to year basis at the time of deciding the exemption u/s 11 of the Act
R Enterprises Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Section 83 of the CGST Act empowers the concerned authority to provisionally attach assets, in cases where the proceedings have been initiated under Chapter XII, XIV or XV of the CGST Act and the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of […]
