Mahavir Enterprise Vs Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax (Gujarat High Court) (Gujarat High Court) Therefore, to sum up, the High Court can interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against a show cause notice where the same is issued by an authority in exercise of the power which is absent; the facts does […]
Detained Tobaco Product Released on Payment of Tax along with Penalty and after providing Bank Guarantee of Equal to the value of goods detained.
The issue under consideration is regarding the show cause notice issued by GST department to Colgate Palmolive India Ltd for detention of goods.
It is an admitted position that the impugned order dated 14.5.2020 is passed without hearing the petitioner and only on the short ground, the impugned order dated 14.5.2020 is hereby quashed and set aside and the authorities concerned shall pass a fresh order on merits without being influenced by the order impugned after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Shiv Agro Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court) For final decision regarding confiscation of goods and conveyance under GST, the applicant has to file statutory appeal under Section 107 of the G.S.T. Act before the appellate authority. Filing writ petition before court will not able to solve the issue since they will not interfere […]
Section 84A of the Gujarat VAT Act is declared as ultra vires and beyond the legislative competence of the State Legislature under Entry 54 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India and is also declared to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India on the ground of being manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable and oppressive.
Asman investments Ltd. Vs DCIT (Gujarat High Court) Interest as per Interest Act will be charged on company irrespective of its main object whether it is Finance or not In the given case the appellant assessee filed return of chargeable interest on 29.1.2002 declaring chargeable interest at ‘Nil’. In the statement attached to the return […]
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
