F S Enterprise Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) Insofar as the Lorry Receipt issued by the transporter is concerned, carrying the same is not a requirement prescribed under rule 138A(1) of the rules. It was submitted that under the circumstances, in the absence of any statutory provision empowering the respondents to make an [&hel...

Ms. H.M. Industrial Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise (Gujarat High Court) Section 83 of the CGST Act inter alia provides that where during the pendency of any proceedings under sections 67, 73 or 74, the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of the Government revenue, […]...

Pr. CIT Vs Late Shantaben P. Patel (Gujarat High Court) In this case Since assessee had relied on the estimate made by the Registered Valuer for the purpose of supporting its value of the asset, any such situation would be governed by clause (a) of section 55A and AO could not have resorted to clause […]...

Pr. CIT Vs Green Associates (Gujarat High Court) Assessee had claimed deduction in respect to the income arising out of such activity under section 80IB (10) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim mainly on the ground that the assessee was not the owner of the land and the approval of […]...

Synergy Fertichem Pvt.Ltd Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) In the present case, the show­ cause notice dated 01.03.2019 has been issued under section 130 of the CGST Act calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the goods in question as well as the vehicle should not be confiscated for non-payment […]...

Sale of Agricultural Land by the assessee was not 'adventure in the nature of trade' and therefore, profit earned on such sales cannot be taxed as business income....

Purviben Snehalbhai Panchhigar Vs ACIT (Gujarat High Court) In the present case the Assessing Officer has heard the material on record which would prima facie suggest that the assessee had sold number of shares of a company which was found to be indulging in providing bogus claim of long term and short term capital gain. […]...

Messrs Maxim Tube Company Pvt Ltd. Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) CONCLUSION – Condition that renders the very scheme of advance authorization nugatory, does not have any nexus to the objective of the advance authorization i.e. to boost export, is unsustainable in law. FACTS – Para 4.14 of the FTP was amended vide […]...

Madhav Gopaldas Shah Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) In a Bogus GST Billing Case Submission of learned senior advocate for the applicant that the applicant is a young person pursuing studies in Chartered Accountancy and was employed under the co-accused Hitendra Shah. . Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submit...

MCA order in publishing the list of directors  associated with struck off companies under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 on the Website of MCA, showing the status of assessee as disqualified Directors was not legally tenable as section 164(2) of the Companies Act would take effect only from the financial year 2014-15. ...