Himachal Pradesh High Court held that benefit u/s 80IC not available when only small part of entire process is carried out at unit and other process is outsourced.
Court, while exercising power under Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act, can proceed to compound offence even after recording of conviction by courts below.
Respondent furnished inaccurate particulars of his income in the garb of fictitious cash sales with a view to claim Section 81-IC exemption
VAT exemption was allowable to Rusk also as same as Bread because the raw material as also the manufacturing process for Bread and Rusk was same and thereafter only the moisture was extracted, would not term that activity to be falling within the meaning of manufacturer as used in the Act.
Bhagwan Singh Vs State of Himachal (Himachal High Court) It is concluded that SARFAESI Act and RDB Act shall have overriding effect to provisions of HPVAT Act. Hence, the said property is to be permitted to be transferred in favour of petitioners free from all encumbrances in terms of E-aution. Facts- Petitioners are purchasers of […]
PCIT Vs Smart Value Products And Services Ltd. (Himachal Pradesh High Court) In the present case, Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal have carefully gone through the record of the case and have found that the Assessing Officer had computed monthwise and quarter wise trading account for enhancing the gross profit. The Assessing Officer […]
Pooja Cotspin Limited Vs State of Himachal (Himachal Pradesh High Court) The first proviso to Section 62(5) of the Himachal Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 enables the State to issue notification and allow any dealer to avail of any incentive on tax, if such incentive has been declared by the State before the commencement […]
Rattan Lal Bhardwaj Vs State Of Himachal Pradesh (Himachal Pradesh High Court) Article 39(d) of the Constitution of India provides for equal pay for equal work. This right of the person for equal pay for equal work is recognized as a fundamental right by various pronouncements of the Apex Court and the law is settled […]
Prateek Garg Vs Intelligence Officer (Himachal Pradesh High Court) 1. Both these petitions are being decided by a common order as common questions of law are involved. 2. Petitioners have been booked for offences under Section 132(1)(b)(i) of Central General Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 (for short CGST Act) and Section 20 (xv) of […]
When a statutory form is created by law for redressal of grievance, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation. Therefore, assessee had not only have efficacious remedy, rather alternative remedy under the GST Act, and therefore, the present petition was not maintainable.
