Gujarat High Court in case of Shree Govind Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Gujarat held that mere expiry of e-way bill during transit of vehicle cannot be a valid ground for detention and seizure.
It was the specific case of Mr. Chandubhai Bhagwandas Patel wherein even though Form GSTR-1 for the month of August 2019 was correctly filed declaring all the relevant details qua outward supplies appropriately, refund of IGST paid upon export of goods was denied to the petitioner due to mistake being committed in Form GSTR-3B for the said month.
Firmenich Aromatics Production (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) Gujarat High Court issues notice to Central Government and State seeking to know steps to taken for constituting GST Tribunal. The Hon’ble Court issues notice to Central Government and State seeking to know steps taken for constituting GST Tribunal, even after the […]
PCIT Vs Shukla Dairy Pvt. Ltd. (Gujarat High Court) We note that during the assessment proceedings, assesses had submitted before assessing officer (AO), the cash payment register and explained each of the item of proposed addition as per show cause notice of assessing officer. The cash payment register, which is placed at paper book page […]
It was C.O.C which has not taken efficient measures to complete the C.I.R.P of the Corporate Debtor Company. Even in the summary findings where the order of the adjudicating authority is quoted, it is made out that it was not the case that the C.O.C had raised any dissatisfaction with regard to the conduct of the petitioner or that there had been a lapse on his part.
The Honble Gujarat High Court held that the Notification could not be said to have been published without declaration form or digital signature certificate. Only after the declaration form and documents are signed digitally that they can be uploaded for e-publishing which has been done on 06.03.2018 at 19:15 hours in the present matter. Therefore, the effective date of Notification in terms of Section 25(4) of the Act is the date of its publication in Official Gazette in e-mode on 06.03.2018.
Manorama Kumari D/O. Uma Shankar Prasad Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court) Petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus or certiorari or any other writ to direct the respondent Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Union of India, to complete the process of reappointment of the petitioner within time period. The second limb of the prayer […]
Gujarat High Court held that notice invoking arbitration clause issued under section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 doesn’t require that the nature of dispute has to be enumerated or explained in the notice.
Gujarat High Court held that details relating to share application money from the four entities was supplied by the assessee during regular assessment and AO was satisfied with the genuineness of the same Hence reopening the assessment doubting the same entries on the basis of change of opinion is unsustainable.
It is not in dispute that the assessee accounted for provision of interest twice by mistake and on realising such mistake, necessary rectification entries were passed in the subsequent year and the same was offered as income.
