The court analysed whether the reason account blocked falls within the scope of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It held that the provision applies only when dishonour is linked to insufficient funds or lack of arrangement.
Official Liquidator Vs Kirloskar Institute (Karnataka High Court) The Karnataka High Court considered an appeal filed by the Official Liquidator of Mysore Kirloskar Ltd. (the company in liquidation) challenging the order dated 21.07.2015 passed by the Company Court in Company Application No.826/2011 in Company Petition No.166/2001. The Company Court had dismissed the application filed by […]
The Court held that blocking of the Electronic Credit Ledger must automatically cease after one year under Rule 86A(3). Continued restriction beyond the statutory period was declared illegal.
The High Court condoned delay in filing a GST appeal where the taxpayer believed the supplier would rectify an ITC mismatch. The appeal was restored for decision on merits.
The Karnataka High Court held that once cognizance is taken, a private complaint assumes the nature of an FIR and may be referred to by the complainant during testimony. The Court upheld the Magistrate’s decision permitting such reference.
Karnataka High Court held that the Income tax returns, assessment particulars and related financial details do constitute “personal information” within the meaning of Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Karnataka High Court held that taxpayer cannot be permitted to retract voluntary disclosed income admitted in return of income filed nearly 14 months after the survey without giving evidence of coercion. Accordingly, appeal of assessee stands dismissed.
The Karnataka High Court held that consolidating multiple financial years into a single show cause notice under Section 74 is illegal and without jurisdiction. The impugned notice was quashed with liberty to initiate fresh proceedings.
The High Court quashed the adjudication order after finding that the authority failed to consider uncontroverted submissions on valid tax invoices and GSTR filings, directing fresh hearing.
The Karnataka High Court set aside an order invalidating a return for alleged non-compliance with Section 44AB audit requirements and directed a fresh hearing on whether turnover actually exceeded ₹10 crores.
