In the absence of failure on the part of assesse to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, the reopening of assessment beyond a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year was without authority of law.
On harmonious reading provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules it was held that the increase in the rate of enrollment fees was properly and adequately justified and the provisions of both the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules were not in conflict with each another and would prevail under the law..
Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order/direction and direct the respondent authorities to provide all the service of diagnosis, laboratory investigation and further treatment of COVID-19 to all the persons free of cost to affected or suspected of the said pandemic
CIT Vs Oil And Natural Gas Corporation Ltd (Gujarat High Court) In terms of the above Circular No.15 dated 8.5.1969, for the purpose of calculation of tax deductible at source under section 192, self-certification on the part of the employee that the conveyance was owned by him and being used by him for the purposes […]
ICAI had no power to conduct any disciplinary proceedings without written allegations and in the absence of any information as prescribed under Rules 7 of the Rules 2007 the prima facie opinion derived by the authority lacked jurisdiction and had no foundation.
SUO MOTU Vs State of Gujarat through Chief Secretary, Gandhinagar (Gujarat High Court) In the wake of the Pandemic of Corona Virus (COVID19), let suo motu Public Interest Litigation be registered giving title of Precautionary Measures In The Wake Of The Pandemic of Corona Virus (COVID-19). Let the following be impleaded as party-respondents:- (i) State […]
Amit Shah seeks regular bail in Gujarat High Court for GST Act offences. Court considers arrest duration, charge nature, and conditions for release.
The applicant is facing charge under Section 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which is punishable maximum for a period of 5 years. As in the present case, wrongful availment of the Input Tax Credit is beyond Rs.5 crores
Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd Vs. Union of India (Gujarat High Court) 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr.Nirzar Desai, learned Standing Counsel waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent no.1. Mr.Parth Bhatt, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3. Mr.Kartik Pandya, learned advocate waives […]
N J Devani Builders Pvt. Ltd Vs Union Of India (Gujarat High Court) Petitioner had voluntarily registered under the head of ‘commercial /industrial construction services’, the petitioner is liable to pay service tax, is not tenable as the petitioner cannot be held to be liable to pay service tax before 01.06.2007, where, it is not […]
