Held that the department cannot proceed against a person found liable to prosecute him for the offence under Section 276CC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without sanction under section 278B.
Respondent had voluminous transactions, it committed an error while posting the relevant dividend entry, which was covered by one voucher since it was received on the same security.
Since the ex-promoters/directors and similarly situated chartered accountants have been granted bail, there is no reason why the Applicant should be treated any differently. Bail granted
Power of RBI to withhold remittance to be made under Automatic route to Wholly owned Subsidiary cannot be used to reject the remittance on whimsical and arbitrary reasons.
Culver Max Entertainment Private Limited Vs F1.mylivecricket.live and Ors (Delhi High Court) Defendants No. 1 to 39 are said to be rogue infringing websites engaged in the business of uploading pirated and unlicensed content. Among the various illegal acts done by them is the live streaming of various sporting events. Unauthorized communication/ broadcast to public […]
More than adequate opportunities to complete the disciplinary proceedings arising from Departmental Charge Sheet dated 16.07.2015 had been granted by the CAT firstly in 2016, and then again in 2020. Extension rightly not granted
Power under Section 9 could only be exercised for preservation of the subject matter of the dispute till the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal and scope of relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act could not be extended for directing specific performance of the contract.
Voltas Limited Vs Ashok Kumar (Delhi High Court) It has been submitted that the present suit has been filed seeking permanent injunction restraining Defendant No. 1 from infringing the plaintiff‟s registered trademark(s) through use of the registered and well-known trademarks VOLTAS and/or the VOLTAS Logo on the website www.myvoltascare.com, passing off the Impugned Website as […]
Petitioner states that impugned order and consequential notices of demand and penalty raising a demand of income tax amounting to Rs. 48 crores are in complete contravention of the order passed by NCLT
Ernst And Young U.S. LLP Vs ACIT (Delhi High Court) Court is of the view that the Petitioner-Assessee has a right to get adequate time in accordance with the Act to submit its reply. Section 148A(b) permits the Assessing Officer to suo moto provide up to thirty days period to an assessee to respond to […]
