On Further hearing in the case of J K Mittal & Company Vs. Union Of India & Ors. on 18th July 2017, Delhi High Court has held that till further orders, all legal services provided by advocates, law firms of advocates, or LLPs of advocates will be continued to be governed by the reverse charge […]
Whether the ITAT was correct in law in holding that the amount received by the assessee by way of exemption of sales tax payments was not a trading receipt but was a capital receipt, hence not liable to tax?
Mr Ganesh states that although at this stage he is not pressing for any ad interim directions, the requirement for compliance of the impugned ICDS would arise at the time filing of returns and therefore it is important that the petition be heard at an early date after completion of pleadings.
Petitioner is filing this Public Interest Litigation before this Hon’ble Court seeking recourse against the patently discriminatory and illegal treatment being meted out to the women of India by the unconstitutional and illegal imposition of a Goods and Services Tax at a high rate of 12% on sanitary napkins.
In this case Delhi High Court held that as of date there is no clarity on whether all legal services (not restricted to representational services) provided by legal practitioners and firms would be governed by the reverse charge mechanism.
Unfortunately undervaluing of immovable properties so as to either pay less stamp duty or for other reasons of concealment of income etc, is ripe in this country, however, the appellant/plaintiff cannot take any benefit of the same in view of the provision of Section 25 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and which specifies that inadequacy of consideration is not a ground for cancelling of a contract. In any case, it is very much possible that the declared consideration need not have been the actual consideration, and which of course this Court does not deal with or is not concerned with in view of the categorical provision of Explanation II to Section 25 of the Indian Contract Act.
The present matter has brought forth the problems faced by citizens in free access to accurate and comprehensive sets of laws in India. The availability of accurate legal texts, at minimal cost, is fundamental to the rule of law and a basic responsibility of the Government. With the advent of the internet, it is imperative that the Government make all efforts possible to provide comprehensive access to legislations and subordinate legislations online. While efforts have been made in this arena, a lot remains to be done.
The provision contained in section 138 of the N.I. Act makes it clear that it is not every return of a cheque unpaid which leads to prosecution of an offence under the said provision of law.
The mere fact that the Assessing Officer was busy in other time- bearing assessments can hardly be an excuse, particularly given the fact that under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the time period for filing of an appeal is 120 days. No other statute prescribes the time period of over three months. Moreover, there is no explanation for every day’s delay. A delay of 335 days cannot be said to be routine.
The division bench of the Delhi High Court dismissed a petition filed against ICAI seeking expedite hearing on a complaint relating to Professional Misconduct. The petitioners, Wholesale Trading Services P Ltd, approached the High Court seeking a direction to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) to complete the inquiry on the complaint made by the petitioner of professional misconduct within a maximum period of four weeks.
