Pr. CIT Vs M/s. E Smart Systems Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi High Court) It is relevant to state that AO in his remand report dated 10.10.2016 did not dispute the veracity of the additional evidences furnished by the assessee and further learned CIT(A) did not admit the additional evidences purely on technical ground which is wholly […]
Rockwell Industries Vs Commissioner of Trade & Taxes & Anr. (Delhi High Court) HC held that it appears to us that in the present case the default assessment order has been generated only to defeat the refund claim of the petitioner, which, in any event, ought to have been paid well before the impugned orders […]
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, […]
Puneet Sharma Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) 649 applications were received by Department of Legal Affairs’ circular dated 06th July, 2018 for 37 members (Judicial/Accountant) in ITAT. Considering the huge number of applications received for the above-mentioned posts, the interim Search-cum-Selection Committee deemed it fit to conjointly read Section 252 of the […]
CIT Vs Alpha G. Corp Development Ltd. (Delhi high Court) High Court held that strategic investments have to be considered for disallowance under Section 14A but assessee is entitled to contend that the investments are legacy Investments or one-time investment and that there is in fact no expenditure incurred to earn the tax-free income. FULL […]
Abbott Healthcare Private Limited & Anr Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court) Delhi High Court has stayed the order passed by the National Anti-profiteering Authority wherein NAA had rejected the plea that CGST Section 171 was not applicable to reduction in rate of tax as compared with pre-GST indirect tax regime, and […]
The Court is of the view that the present petition also be placed for consideration before the GST Council. If there has already been a pre-consultation with the Petitioner then the petition be placed before the GST Council on the same date when it is considering the case of the Solar Power Developers Association.
The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi vide Judgment dated 6th June, 2019 passed in Crl. A. No.660/2017 titled Sikodh Mahto vs. State and in Crl No.698/2017 titled Prabhu Mahto vs. State while quashing the order passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, acquitted the appellants in case involving alleged seizure of contraband (Charas weighing 2 Kg. each from said appellants).
Penalty under section 271AAA could not be imposed on assessee on the ground that assessee failed to substantiate the manner in which undisclosed income was derived in case assessee had included the same in his return of income and accepted by AO without making any addition to the returned income.
Mr Satyakam informs the Court that Mr Rajesh Prasad has undertaken a complete review of the procedure and in view of what has transpired in the Court, he undertakes to disband the RAC. He proposes to issue appropriate notification to authorize a proper officer in respect of the refunds above the certain value strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Delhi GST Act. He undertakes to place before the Court on the next date, by way of an affidavit, the steps taken by him in this regard.
