Petitioner is challenging imposition of GST on the confectionery items on the ground that it does not come within the purview of taxes at the rate of 18% to 28%, as imposed by the respondents....

The undisputed fact reveals that at the time an ex-parte order was passed in assessee's main appeal, the limitation prescribed under Section 254(2) was four years and the assessee was under an expression as the limitation is four years his application under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was within limitation. ...

Carrying of sharp edged weapons with a blade more than 6 inches long or 2 inches wide and spring actuated knives with a blade of any size is prohibited and that too carrying of such blades in public places. Gurudwara, though is open to public, is not a public place, it is a private place where there is Prakash of Gurugranth Sahib....

The complainant submits that because the complainant was to deposit the court fees, but due to financial insufficiency suffered by him, he could not make the deposit at the relevant time. It is also contended that during the said period, the Demonetisation was also in force, therefore, his non-deposit of the court fees be condoned and set...

The Hon'ble MP High court in the above stated case placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation vs. President, Rajasthan Roadways Union & Anr....

On going through the aforesaid reason, it is clear that the appellant has filed the application in a most casual manner, without justifying the reason for condonation of such a huge delay. In the circumstances, in the absence of any sufficient cause to explain the delay of 227 days...

CIT Vs. Mechmen (Madhya Pradesh High Court) In this case court observed that satisfaction was not recorded by the AO before issuing notice u/s 153C which is a fact decided by ITAT. No paper or document was seized against the assessee in the search operation. ...

In the Case of Shree Builders Vs. UOI, M.P.High Court issued notice to Union of India against validity of section 234E of Income Tax Act,1961 and granted stay of demand. Case was argued by A.P.Shrivastava Advocate accompanied by Advocate Sapan Usrethe....

Brief facts of the case are that the respondent is a joint venture with Government of Madhya Pradesh, declared its total income nil in its return filed for the assessment year 2001-2002 and 2002-2003. The book profit was calculated under section 115JB of the Act....

In the present case, in September 2007 the search was carried out in the premises of Dr. Yogi Raj Sharma. The document Annexure RJ-1 was seized by the respondents. At the relevant time petitioner no. 1 was the Chief Health Secretary and this fact was within the knowledge...